IR 05000250/1990033
| ML17348A736 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 11/02/1990 |
| From: | Conlon T, Hunt M, Mark Miller NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17348A734 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-250-90-33, 50-251-90-33, NUDOCS 9011160149 | |
| Download: ML17348A736 (10) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION 11 101 MARIETTASTREET, N.W.
ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30323 Report Nos.:
50-250/90-33 and 50-251/90-33 Licensee:
Florida Power and Light Company 9250 West Flagler Street Miami, FL 33102 Docket Nos.:
50-250 and 50-251 License Nos.:
DPR-31 and DPR-41 Facility Name:
Turkey Point 3 and
r Inspection Conducted:
October 1-5, 1990 Inspectors:
unt s.er t
Approved by:
on on, ief Plant Systems Section Division of Reactor Safety a
e gned
]s
>
g5 a e gned f1~ >0 at Signed SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, announced inspection was conducted in the areas of electrical construction activities related to the licensee's Emergency Power System Enhancement Program.
Procedure reviews and plant observations were performed to assess the licensee's implementation of the
CFR 50.59 commitments made to NRR for control of the plant configuration during the construction and testing phase of the program.
Results:
In the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identified.
The licensee's design and construction program was found to be effective with a few minor exceptions.
The procedures reviewed for electrical cable and equipment installation are written to incorpor'ate the construction specification into the construction activities and were found adequate.
t Strengths:
There is a strong construction and design engineering staff onsite.
901ifb0149 eoii02 PDR ADOCK 05000250
PNU
e The licensee employed three cable installation consultants to review their cable installation program.
Weaknesses:
Field observations revealed that some field bends of conduits were slightly flattened during the bending process.
The gC acceptance criteria did not fully address the acceptability of these field bend e REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted e
2.
Licensee Employees J. Broadwater, Startup Supervisor
- W. D. Brown, Construction Services - Site Manager D. Buschman, Construction Planner
- R. I. Daly, Outage Manager
'S.
T. Hale, Engineeri'ng Project Manager
- K. N. Harris, Vice President S. Hellriegel, Planning/Scheduling
- M. P.
Huba, Nuclear Lead Engineer D. B. Jenkins, Electrical Power System - Construction A. I. Kennedy, Electrical Power System - Startup
- J. E. Knorr, Regulatory Compliance Supervisor
- R. S. Kundalkar, Project Engineer
- L. W. Pearce, Plant Manager
- T. F. Plunkett, Site Vice President
- D. R. Powell, Licensing Superintendent D. L. Smith, Electrical Design
- J. D. Webb, Scheduling Supervisor Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included craftsmen, engineers, technicians, and administrative personnel.
Other Organizations J. Giovas, Construction, Engineering Manager, Bechtel Power Corporation (BCP)
R. Johnson, Construction, Lead Electrical Engineer, BCP J. Robertson, Construction, Site Manager, BCP H. 0. Bourque, Project Engineer, Ebasco Corporation NRC Resident Inspectors
- R. Butcher, Senior Resident Inspector
"Attended exit interview Program/Procedure Review (92701)
The inspectors reviewed the licensee's electrical construction program, procedures, and specifications for the new diesel generator program.
This documentation was reviewed to determine if NRC requirements and licensee commitments have been implemented for safety-related electrical systems,
cable, and components, In addition the electrical specifications and procedures were reviewed to determine if these documents have sufficient detail and clarity for adequate work performance and control.
The licensee and contractor programs.were reviewed to determine if any generic problems or weaknesses exist within the operation of organizations responsible for quality assurance.
Work procedures were reviewed to ensure applicable quality assurance requirements were incorporated.
The licensee and contractor electrical construction programs for the emergency diesel generators are primarily controlled by three categories of documents.
These three categories were reviewed by the inspectors and are described as follows:
a.
FPL Construction Procedures
- These are the licensee's administrative site construction procedures used to specify and control work activities including gC requirements.
Six of these were electrical procedures.
b.
Bechtel Power Corporation, Contractor Field Procedures
- There are two procedures, one for Class 1E conduit hangers and one for electrical cable and terminations.
The purpose of these procedures is to provide direction for field control of electrical equipment installed by the contractor.
c.
Electrical Installation Drawings - There are two drawings, one for raceways and one for electrical components.
These drawings are actually the pseudo electrical specifications customized for the diesel generation modification.
Both drawings are quite extensive containing complete specifications, design details, work instructions, notes," and testing requirements.
The inspector noted that the three types'f procedures and, drawings discussed above compliment each other and appear to be satisfactory.
The site design engineering department controls the construction program and construction engineering program by controlling the Electrical Installation Specification Drawings.
No changes can be made without design engineering approval of a
Change Request Notice (CRN) to the specifications drawings.
One minor weakness was identified by the inspectors pertaining to the programs and one procedure.
Construction guality Control Technique Sheet TS,10.31-2, Electrical Condui.t Installation Inspection PTP 384, does not have specific acceptance-rejection criteria for flatness 'in conduit bends.
The inspection requirement for conduit bends is that "conduit bends do not cause flattening or wrinkles".
During the inspector's walkdown bending flatness was.observed in non-gC inspected conduit.
The. licensee's engineering departments stated appropriate corrective action would be taken to address flatness in conduit bends before installation and the gC inspectio e 3.
Documentation Review The inspectors reviewed nonconformance reports (NCR), work process sheets, change request notices (CRN) and cable pulling calculations to verify that engineering and gC were adequately inspecting and controlling construction activities.
Seven NCRs were reviewed to identify gC concerns and evaluate the engineering dispositions.
Five NCRs were for cable pulling, one NCR for conduit installation, and one NCR for defective terminal blocks.
The inspectors determine gC used the conservative approach for identifying problems and engineering adequately and thoroughly disposition the NCRs.
The inspectors reviewed four work process sheets (PS) for the installation of the new diesel generators 5KV switchgear 3AD and 4AD; and motor control centers (MCC)
4J and MCC 4k.
In addition five change request notices (CRN) involving the switchgear and MCCs were also reviewed.
The licensee uses work process sheets as installation instructions and the bill of material in conjunction with a work order for construction activities.
The inspectors determined the process work sheets were very detailed, explicit, and met the requirements of Administrative Site Procedure ASP-34, Preparation of Process Sheets and Installation Lists.
The five change requests notices (CRNs) previously discussed were attached to the work process sheets.
The CRNs were used to customize the electrical installation drawings discussed in Paragraph 2.c.. These changes included adding new instructions, for welding, bolting down arrangements, relocat-ing thermostates, specifying'old points, and vendor manuals.
The inspectors found the CRN changes to the construction specification as a
satisfactory and effective method for controlling construction activities.
The inspector reviewed cable pulling calculations and three cable pulling reports by consultants.
In addition several engineering inter-office memorandums were also reviewed.
These memorandums discussed design engineering policy for cable pulling lubricants and calculations.
Cable pulling calculations performed both manually and by Bechtel, Computer Program EA499 were reviewed and found acceptable.
Design engineering approved the use of the computer program.
The licensee (engineering)
hired three cable pulling consultants to assess their cable pulling program.
Overall, the consultants found the licensee cable pulling program to be adequate.
The inspectors concurred.
4.
Field observations The inspectors conducted walkdowns to review construction activities and equipment which was in the process of installation.
The electrical and engine control panels for'he 4A'nd 4B Emergency Diesel Generators (EDG) were in place and electrical cables were being terminated.
It was noted that some lugged wires were not terminated or had been determinated and taped.. The licensee stated that after a cable termination had been gC
e accepted the determination would be documented in the 'operations depart-ment lifted lead and jumper log.
The determinated cables observed had not been gC accepted.
The inspector noted that until the equipment had been turned over to the Operations Department another method of logging and controlling determinations might be suitable.
The licensee advised that they were considering such a program.
Several sections of various Motor Control Centers had been set in place and were protected from the hazards that exist during construction in the immediate area.
Some flanges for solenoid valves were found not protected after the solenoid valves had been removed from the piping and replaced with spool pieces.
The EDG 4B day tank had three open flanges.
The inspectors informed the licensee who advised that flushing and cleaning activities as well as startup testing had been or was in progress.
Covers were installed on the fl'anges immediately.
No damage to any flanges was noted.
5.
A walkdown of installed conduits and supports revealed that the field routed conduit runs were layed out in a logical manner and the supports were in accordance with specifications and drawings.
The workmanship and installation appearance was good with the exception of some 2 inch conduit bends.
Several bends exhibited flattening which could cause problems when pulling cables through them.
The licensee was aware of bend deficiencies in some larger conduits but had not inspected the bends identified by the inspectors.
It should be noted that the conduits are checked by the construction engineers before they are offered for gC acceptance.
An observation of cable testing in progress was made.
The electricians had the appropriate work orders and were meggering the cables in accordance with instructions.
The gC inspector was present and monitoring the cable testing.
The startup engineers were observed flushing and testing piping systems.
All work was being done in accordance with site procedures.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on October 4, 1990, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1.
The inspectors described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results.
Proprietary information is not contained in this repor ~
'