IR 05000324/1993050

Insp Repts 50-324/93-50 & 50-325/93-50 on 931025-29.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Investigation of Unit 2 Fuel Pool Leakage Problem,Tendon Surveillance Program & Followup on Previous Insp Findings

ML20058J381
Person / Time
Site:	Brunswick
Issue date:	11/17/1993
From:	Blake J, Lenahan J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20058J377	List: IR 05000324/1993050 ML20058J372
References
50-324-93-50, 50-325-93-50, NUDOCS 9312140089
Download: ML20058J381 (6)

Text

- - . . - - . . . - .

.

!

S o UNITED STATES

/ e nic (*e NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[, , ;' t REGloN 11 ,

& ( O 101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W., SUITE 2900 '

f ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323-0199  ;

%...../

'

,

Report Nos.: 50-325/93-50 and 50-324/93-50

!

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 I and 2 ,

'

Inspection Conducted: October 25 - 29, 1993

!

Inspector: f/ N//G[f)

Date Signed J. J. Le han ff '  ;

Approved by: ' t. - 3

// 7 J. J BlpKe', Chief Date Signed Hat ia7andProcessesSection Eng neering Branch l Division of Reactor Safety j f

SUMMARY j Scope:

This special, announced inspection was conducted in the areas of investigation of the Unit 2 fuel pool leakage problem, the tendon surveillance program, and followup on previous inspection finding Results:

In the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identifie The licensee's actions to resolve the fuel pool leakage problem and implement the tendon surveillance program are technically sound, conservative and thoroug I i

l l

9312140089 931118 i PDR ADOCK 05000324 i G PDR i

-_ ._ _ .

.

,

i a

REPORT DETAILS

Persons Contacted  :

• H. Beane, Quality Control Manager

• H. Bordeaux, Quality Control Supervisor T. Eason, Quality Control Supervisor

'

R. Godley, NRC Compliance Manager

• R. Grazio, Site Manager, Nuclear Engineering Department (NED)

L. Grezeck, Project Engineer, NED t

• J. Harness, Supervisor, Nuclear Assessment Department >

• W. Levis, Manager, Regulatory Affairs

• G. Miller, Manager, Technical Support

• J. Titrington, Operations Manager e R. Tripp, Supervisory Civil Engineer, NED

• S. Vann, Brunswick Civil Unit Manager, NED .

I *E. Willet, Manager, Project Management  !

I

'

K. Williamson, Project Engineering Manager, NED J. McGowan, Specialist, Regulatory Compliance

!

Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included engineers, technicians, and administrative personne NRC Resident Inspectors

,

• R. Prevatte, Senior Resident Inspector P. Byron, Resident Inspector M. Janus, Resident Inspector ,

l

• Attended exit interview l Fuel Pool Tendon Inservice Inspection - Units 1 and 2 (61701)

'

i The inspector reviewed the licensee's project scoping documents for i performing inspection and surveillance testing of the tendons installed in the reactor building fuel pool girders. The fuel pool girders, which are 5'-0" wide, 42'-3" deep and approximately 150 feet in length, are each post-tensioned with 24 unbonded tendons. There had been no i

.

inspections performed on these tendons since the original installation.

l The scope of work for the tendon surveillance included visual inspection of all tendon end anchorages and hardware, performing tendon lift-off testing on three tendons in each girder, detensioning and subsequent retensioning of one tendon in each girder to remove a wire for testing, and sampling and testing of the corrosion protection material (grease)

in all tendons. The licensee plans to start the tendon inspection in early 199 The licensee's commitment to perform the fuel pool girder tendon !

surveillance inspec+ ion is included in the Brunswick Three Year Plan, ;

Major Project number JIP %^996 i

,

,

__ _

i i

.

.

l l

)

2  !

! Unit 2 Spent Fuel Pool Leak Repair (37700)  !

!

Water leakage has been observed at the elevation 50 reactor building ceiling directly under the Unit 2 spent fuel pool. The leakage was first noticed in September 1976. An evaluation of the leakage was ;

performed by United Engineers (UE&C) at that time. In their evaluation, :

UE&C concluded that no structural or safety concerns existed because of l the leakage and there was no need to locate and repair the leak. The !

leakage was again evaluated in response to questions from an NRC l inspector in July, 1979. Although the conclusions of the evaluation t were the same, i.e., no safety concerns resulted from the leakage, the licensee initiated a program to locate the cause of leak. Several leak '

test methods were implemented, but all were unsuccessful in locating the leak. The amount of leakage is estimated to be .002 gallons per minute -

(0.12 gallons per hour). In November,1986, the licensee concluded that since no degradation of the fuel pool or reactor building had been observed and since the leakage rate is very small, that the effort to ,

locate the leak be suspende ;

In April, 1992 during the inspection documented in NRC Inspection Report number 50-325,324/92-10, concerns were expressed by NRC inspectors regarding the leakage collection system and the source and quantity of '

leakage. The licensee concluded at this time that the leakage represents personnel safety and ALARA concerns and that continued leakage could potentially cause equipment damage. In the Brunswick Three Year Improvement Plan, the licensee committed to undertake a three phase investigation to locate the source of the fuel pool leakage and implement repairs. The fuel pool leak repair is Major Project Number PIO 31377 During the current inspection, the inspector examined results of the Phase I investigation of the leakage which was completed in March -

April, 1993. The inspector reviewed Special Procedure 2-SP-92-077, i Revision 5, Leak Testing and Developing As-Builts of the Spent Fuel Pool !

Liner. The Phase I project included inspections performed by divers to update drawings which show the as-constructed details of the spent fuel pool liner plates. This included locations of seam welds in the plates, location of leak chase channels, embed locations, areas where the plates ;

appear to be damaged, and any attachments to the plates. The inspector l reviewed the surveillance inspection reports prepared by the divers, Brand Utility Service, and the as-built sketches of the liner plate -

sections. The results of the Phase I inspections showed the following:

-

Plugs were missing from a few of the leak channel Test channels were missing from a few small weld Therefore it is possible that these welds had never been leak teste .

,

h t

_

+

.

.

3 ,

-

The floor area where the cask used for transporting spent fuel to the Harris site is placed showed numerous indications, probably due from damage caused by the fuel ;

cas ,

.

The licensee performed ultrasonic testing (UT) and determined that the indications were not through wall ar.d therefore were not the source of the leakage. The inspector reviewed the UT report which summarizes the UT results. The licensee has developed a plant modification to install the missing plugs in the leak chases. This work will be accomplished by divers. The Phase I project also included testing of some of the leak chases. The inspector reviewed the Brand test reports which documented i this testing. No leaks were detected, although some of the results were inconclusiv The inspector also reviewed EQE Calculation 42095-C-001, R0, Spent Fuel <

Pool Slab Evaluation to Assess the Effect on Existing Margins of Composite Behavior with the Prestressed Girders. The purpose of the ,

calculation was to determine the design margin available for the fuel pool and fuel pool girders, taking into account cracking of the fuel pool slab, the operating temperature effects of the fuel pool, and estimated loss of prestress force in the tendons. The calculated margin was 26 percent excess shear capacity. This calculation showed that the fuel pool leakage and cracking observed in the slab should not cause any structural concern The licensee is currently preparing plans to implement the Phase 2 and Phase 3 portions of the inspections. This work will be reviewed in future inspection Violations or deviations were not identifie . Housekeeping and Material Condition in Unit 1 Drywell (62700)

The inspector, accompanied by the Unit 1 Plant Manger, performed a walkdown inspection in the Unit I drywell. During the walkdown, the inspector examined coating work which had recently been completed in areas where structural steel platforms were modified under the miscellaneous steel verification program, whip restraints, conduits and conduit supports, miscellaneous hardware items, and housekeepin The material condition and housekeeping in the drywell was satisfactory, although some minor deficiencies were identified by the inspector. The inspector noted that additional cleaning was required in the downcomers to remove some loose hardware and a scaffold pole, although, overall housekeeping in these areas were acceptable. The inspector also identified some old trouble tickets which were still hanging in the drywell. The Unit 2 plant manager informed the inspector that a walkdown would be performed to remove old trouble tickets and verify

,

_ _ _ _ .

.

.

that work requests had been written to address these items. Work requests will also be issued to address the other minor deficiencies identified by the inspector, and the downcomers will be cleane Violations or deviations were not identifie .0 Action or Previous Inspection Findings (92701) (Closed) Violation item 325,324/93-02-01, Failure to Measure and Evaluate Corrosion of the Drywell Liner Plat The licensee's corrective actions for this violation are stated in their April 5,1993 letter to NRC, Serial: BSEP-93-0042. The cause of the violation was attributed to an inadequate procedure which did not specify clear acceptance criteria for evaluating and tracking corrosion problems. The licensee corrective actions were to develop a special procedure to investigate and repair the drywell liner corrosion and to perform a review of other procedures used by Technical Support personnel to ensure acceptance criteria was clear. The inspector examined the drywell liner repairs for Unit 2 during Inspections 93-02 and 93-15, and for Unit I during Inspections 93-25, 93-31, and 93-45. The liner  ;

repairs are complete During the current inspection the inspector examined Adverse Condition ,

Report (ACR)93-050, the licensee's root cause analysis for this ACR, !

and the results the procedure review. Eighteen procedures were ,

identified in which acceptance criteria did not appear to be clear. One ;

procedure was deleted, nine were revised to clarify acceptance criteria, I and seven were found to need only minor revision to clarify the  !

acceptance criteri .2 (Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item (IFI) 325/93-15-02, Evaluate Unit 1 Conduits for Potential Overspan Conditions prior to Unit Restar During walkdowns in the Unit 2 drywell and reactor building, several concerns were identified by the inspector and licensee engineers regarding overspanned conduits. This item was tracked as Unresolved ,

Item 325/92-27-03, which was closed during Inspection 93-15. The l inspector determined during Inspection 93-15 that the license had a ;

program in place to identify and correct overspanned conduits. During j the walkdown inspection discussed in Paragraph 4, above, the inspector ;

examined conduit spans in the Unit I drywell . The inspector concluded i that the existing spans complied with the licensee's acceptance  ;

criteria. The inspector reviewed Calculation OSEIS-0005, Revision 1, '

Conduit and Cable Tray Overview Report. This calculation addresses concerns regarding overspanned conduits previously identified by the inspector and summarizes the licensee's corrective actions. The i inspector also reviewed randomly selected, QC verified drawings for

'

conduit support repairs implemented under Emergent Structural l Modification 91-011 to resolve conduit overspan conditions. The inspector concluded that the licensee's program to address conduit

,

overspan problems was acceptable.

_ _ _

.

'

.

.

r (Closed) Violation item 324/93-20-02, Performing Unit 2 STSI Cumulative Impact Evaluations Without Use of Documented Instructions or Procedure The licensee's corrective actions for this violation are stated in their June 21, 1993 letter to NRC, Serial: BSEP-93-0081. The corrective actions included revisien of the NED training program to stress the need for procedure compliance. The inspector reviewed NED Procedure 2.2, NED _,

Training Program, and verified that it has been revised to address the i need to have and follow approved procedures to perform safety related work. The inspector examined training records which document training :

in procedural compliance presented to NED personnel in June - July, 199 .4 (0 pen) Violation item 325,324/93-25-02, Failure to follow Document '

Control Procedure in NE ;

The licensee's corrective actions for this violation are stated in their July 19, 1993 letter to NRC, Serial: BSEP-93-0107. The licensee attributed the cause of failure to follow document control procedures cited in the violation were a result of failure of management to clearly '

communicate expectations regarding compliance with document control procedure !

Corrective actions included training of NED personnel to the -

requirements of NED procedure 3.5, Handling of Controlled Document Other corrective actions included a search of work areas by NED ,

supervisory personnel to dispose of uncontrolled copies of procedures '

and design criteria, incorporating structural design guides (SDGs) and mechanical design guide (MDGs) into updated NED Design Guides, distribution of Revision 2 of DG-III.16 to the TAC building. library, and

_

closing of the onsite NED library. Licensee management decided to close the onsite NED library because a large percentage of the documents in the library were outdated. Corrective actions also included assigning ;

varicus NED engineers to develop training objectives and question banks on various NED procedure i The Licensee also has implemented management and organizational changes within NED to address NRC concerns, to improve the efficiency of work ,

performed within NED, and to address deficiencies identified by NAD l assessments. This violation will remain open pending further review by ;

NRC of the impact of the changes on the performance of NE l Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on October 29, 1993, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1. The inspector described

^

the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection result Dissenting comments were not received from the license .

I