ML20133L554
| ML20133L554 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 12/13/1996 |
| From: | Ebneter S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Campbell W CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20133L534 | List: |
| References | |
| EA-96-442, NUDOCS 9701220061 | |
| Download: ML20133L554 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000324/1996015
Text
_ _ _ _ _
-
. _ _ _ _ _ _ .
_._..
_ .
_ _ . _ _ _ _ _
__m
._
g nrog%
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,4
REGION 11
.
AT A TA,
dlA
99
,
\\
/
>
December 13, 1996
EA 96 442
-
Carolina Power & Light Company
ATTN: Mr. W. R. Campbell
Vice President
'
,
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant
Post Office Box 10429
Southport, North Carolina 28461
,
i
SUBJECT:
,
(NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS
0-3 /96 1 AND 50-324/96 16)
'
Dear Mr. Campbell:
This refers to the integrated insp
comp ted on October 26, 1996 at your
Brunswick facility. The inspectio
nelude a review of your failure to
i
provide temperature compensz
on fo the P nt Process Computer (PPC)
i
feedwater flow algorithm wh
ted
operation of Brunswick Unit 2 in
excess of (1) the maximum t
al
wer authorized by the license and (2)
thermal limits require
y Te hqic 1
cification (TS) 3.2.1.
The inspection
report was sent to yo b
in ter da d November 22, 1996. A closed,
i
predecisional enf ce nt(conhren
was conducted in the Region II office on
December 9, 1996, with
u and
aers of your staff to discuss the apparent
violations, the
at cau
,a
your corrective actions to preclude.
recurrence. A
st of con er ce attendees. NRC slides, and a copy of your
presentation m eri is re
closed.
Based on the info at n eveloped during the inspection and the information
you provided durin
e onference, the NRC has determined that violations of
NRC requirements occ r ed. The violations are cited in the enclosed Notice of
'
Violation (Notice) a d the circumstances surrounding them are described in
detail in the subj t inspection report.
Violation A involves the failure to
,
maintain the Unit
thermal power within the operating license limits. On
August 28, 1996 a reactor engineer reviewing core thermal power calculations
associated wit the Power Uprate Project determined that the Unit 2 PPC point
'
'
value for fe water flow was not properly compensated for feedwater
temperature eviations from the normal operating temperature. The condition
had exist
on Unit 2 since the unit restarted after a refueling outage ending
-
in July
94 when Unit 2 was modified to add a new PPC and associated
i
.
softwar
Due to the failure to temperature compensate the feedwater flow
3roce
oint value, the core thermal power calculated and indicated by the
,
)PC
s ess than the actual core thermal power. During periods when
fee ater temperature was lower than the normal operating value, Unit 2 was
o rated at indicated power levels of up to 100 percent power or 2436
gawatts (MW) thermal which was equivalent to actual power levels of up to
02.4 percent power or 2494 MW thermal. This is a violation of License
Condition 2.C.1 of Facility Operating License Number DPR 62 which requires
that Unit 2 be operated at or less than 2436 MW thermal.
9701220061 970109
DR
ADOCK 05000324
' /
. _
_
..
.
..
_ . .__ _
, _ _
_-
.
/p Mog%
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
p"
.-4
REGION ll
"
101 MARlETTA STREET. N.W., SUITE 2900
,
7.
!j
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 303234199
\\*****/
December 13, 1996
EA 96 442
,
Carolina Power & Light Company
ATTN: Mr. W. R. Campbell
Vice President
-
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant
Post Office Box 10429
Southport, North Carolina 28461
.
'
SUBJECT:
(NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-325/96-15 AND 50-324/96-15)
Dear Mr. Campbell:
This refers to the integrated inspection completed on October 26, 1996 at your
Brunswick facility. The inspection included a review of your failure to
provide temperature compensation for the Plant Process Computer (PPC)
3
feedwater flow algorithm which resulted in operation of Brunswick Unit 2 in
4
'
excess of (1) the maximum thermal power authorized by the license and (2)
thermal limits required by Technical Specification (TS) 3.2.1.
The inspection
report was sent to you by letter dated November 22, 1996. A closed,
aredecisional enforcement conference was conducted in the Region II office on
)ecember 9,1996, with you and members of your staff to discuss the apparent
violations, the root causes, and your corrective actions to preclude
.
recurrence. A list of conference attendees. NRC slides, and a copy of your
j
presentation materials are enclosed.
Based on the information developed during the inspection and the information
you provided during the conference, the NRC has determined that violations of
NRC requirements occurred. The violations are cited in the enclosed Notice of
Violation (Notice) and the circumstances surrounding them are described in
detail in the subject inspection report.
Violation A involves the failure to
maintain the Unit 2 thermal power within the operating license limits. On
August 28, 1996, a reactor engineer reviewing core thermal power calculations
associated with the Power Uprate Project determined that the Unit 2 PPC point
value for feedwater flow was not properly compensated for feedwater
temperature deviations from the normal operating temperature. The condition
-
had existed on Unit 2 since the unit restarted after a refueling outage ending
in July 1994 when Unit 2 was modified to add a new PPC and associated
software
Due to the failure to tem @rature compnsate the feedwater flow
arocess point value, the core thermal power calculated and indicated by the
)PC was less than the actual. core thermal power. During periods when
feedwater temperature was lower than the normal operating value, Unit 2 was
operated at indicated power levels of up to 100 percent power or 2436
megawatts (HW) thermal which was equivalent to actual power levels of up to
102.4 percent power or 2494 MW thermal. This is a violation of License
Condition 2.C.1 of Facility Operating License Number DPR-62 which requires
that Unit 2 be operated at or less than 2436 MW thermal.
a
A
ENCLOSURE 2