IR 05000272/1987031

Insp Repts 50-272/87-31 & 50-311/87-32 on 871026-30.No Violations or Deviations Noted.One Unresolved Item Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Action on Previous NRC Findings,Qa Audit Program & QA Procedure Review

ML18093A574
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	12/23/1987
From:	Blumberg N, Finkel A, Prell J, David Silk NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML18093A572	List: IR 05000272/1987031 ML18093A571
References
50-272-87-31, 50-311-87-32, IEB-83-07, IEB-83-7, NUDOCS 8801130277
Download: ML18093A574 (15)

Text

, __ U.:S.. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

'-~0-3llf.87-32 '

R..-e.T:J'.C!f.r:t::No:s....5~.27.2JB7 -31

_ *'*

Drxcikre1~*111n.:s_.* _.:s::ct-:*27.2; -~:so...;3J1

.. U:c::eJJS:.e'N'.o:s_

UP:Jt".7-0;*~lDPR 75

* L-:i:c::e:r:J;s<~:e::

.~P:tLbl i:c:::;::S!e~~ i-c:e ':Electric & Gas Company

.* :P ~ :D_ <B:o:x :236 Hanrm::*k~:s :Bri~d*ge, New Jersey 08038

~ F:a:d]~1~j dfmn:e:

.S..:al!e-m.:iGE:rne:ra ting Station Un its 1 and 2 h1;spi:.e.ti:i:o:n.~'kt: _:TlmJ:criCk'1s *~Bridge, New Jersey

,'JL

.:Fi~*k£e3..., *Senior Reactor Engineer

_ l/Jit! date

/ 2-/z3 /u-7 date

• **hi:s:p.:e:r::Z1:on Srmn!Er~: '.R*out.i*ne unannounced Inspection on October 26-30, 1987

(1".D;s;p:eriiDn -~Re.yrrr:t-':Nri:S-- 5D--272/87-31 and 50-311/87-32)

>Ar-:en.s::*:hisnEr.t:eri::

.-X4i:ai:n:s:e-:e~ s Actions ori Previous NRC Findings, QA Audit

'."Pr.o:g;r:-:mn.,,;.QA*-,p;r-..or..e:dll.rne.iRewi:ew, Nuclear QA Audit Organization Review, Auditor

.. :'.Qua1:9<.'f-j:ca.:tim:i::s *.!am:d."'T:rai'.il'li'n;g, Man agernent I nvo l vernent, Aud it Schedule, Aud it

• -:1mplt~-t*:i:o:n,, :r:.-w.r:r-:e:ct.i.w,e Action P rograrn, Genera tor Main Trans fo rrners,

'Tran:sf:orm:e'f"Mnir:i~n~:,_sy:sterns, and Salem Units 1 and 2 Station Power

• T rarrsfxirmer.s~

cRe!S!l:ll':t:s:: - Dmr.e 11.'lm>E:s:o>lwied :ttern, (failure to respond to corrective action reports

• -.in ;a~:t4~rrrely ~rrra~r.nniEr) <W:a:S i*rientifie No violations or deviations were

--:.-tdem~Wi*E:CL 88O11 3 0'277 :~'871ZZ3 F'DR ADO:CK '.()'5-00-0272 (]

• .,,

DCD

1.Tl

_* :p'E'r:sun:s I:ant:ar::te d

'*J_ :Z..ur.pJt..iG,,Jr_.., i::Stati:o*n Manager

+:L 1.'.ow.e., :s~up:ervi sof.-OA Audits Details

'A,..

5:t-:encb:tl'.f.1l~ :Jl:ri*m:i :iva 1 Engineer-QA Training and An a 1 y s i s

'£.. ;R:aw:.eTI:s.h:.e:ar.. <_:,Le-ad A-ud ito r L :SrhY.em:b:eTg;e'r,. SeTI'li or Sta ff Engineer

'*B..

RD~gi:o<').Li:c:.ensing Engineer J.. Ru.-c:k-L, -.Se-rrr:or St.ai'f Engineer

"11]_ -l"lallb:.eT.,_ :QI'./.Su:perv::Lsor

__ D_:S_ :N:i.r.cl:e:ar =R.:Ebul:ato*ry Commission

'*T.. -OW:rrn_y.., ::S£T.J-:tur Re:si.Ii e n t I n spec tor

'*'JL.£'3:b:s:cm., Re:Si dEnt I:n spec to r

r:n:e i:n:s:p;ert'IJT.s.'al-SD tn~ld discussions with other licensee personnel during

tb::e :-C-cnt.r:s:.e :of '.'+/-"bi :s 4n:sp e ct i o n.

'?*'.D-..e:n:ct..t;:e:s thm:s-:e-:pr-e:s:e:r.r.t at the exit meeting on October 30, 1987

2.Ii.Ll:c..e:r:r.-s-:e-:e 11:s.Art4n-n:s D'Tl :Pre vi o us N RC. Fi n di n gs

~l.:. :-C:Cl:Gs~u) '.hfRC B.ul }et in 83-07 ( 50-272/83-07 and 50-311/83-07).

~Ray 'f'.lill~.r_, 111:c:_.:delivered certified material that apparently had

--:b:e-'.ETI :sub:s~>tt.u-t-e:d :,with non-certified type material The licensee was

• n:q._trfr1e:d 'L'D det--e-r.mine where suspect material had been installed in

~hr.e -:pl~:;, -evaluate its safety significance, and tag or dispose of the subject material not yet installe *-1":A:e li:c.:.en:s--,e.e.D'P.,J,une 12, 1984 notified the NRC that they received s.t.3-j:'l'.ll:e.:s:s *::s+/-:e:e l. :pipe and fittings from Richmond Engineering Company

<\\(illll::G}-:trnrrt**fratLb:een furnished by Ray Miller, In The material was

<!:.i:S:erl i"IJ::S:alE'JllJ:s:DJCS Holdup Tanks, Liquid Waste Monitor Tanks and the

£w;a:p;o:~_.-;;_Bott:om Tank None of the Ray Miller, Inc. material was*

rr_,qe__'d *]'T.1

s..'a"f-e1:.y r:e*l ate d a pp 1 i cat i on s.

TD h:eil:p :a:s:s:ure th:at this subject would not be repeated, the licensee

de*,17,elD

pEd_,...:a -.s:p-:erizal training program on the subject for QA/QC

-;pcer:snm:1-e1._,~:~r:han:g*e:d the basic training program to include this subject

• acra:d rh:a:n:g;e:d*-t+ie fJJllowing Quality Assurance Procedures (QAP):

OAP 3-.:1, P*l'.'D~curement Document Review

<QAP _3.:,-2, s~up:plier Evaluation/Approval

-**:QAP 4~1~,: R-.eueiving Inspection

"T*h:e :a:bove liste:d ~rocedures re qui re material veri fi cation of a 11 lis:te:ci: mat:.eri:a l :End a sampling of n on-Q material per Attachment 3 of

• :Q-A--P :.zt;.:l_

"Fhe i"r1:s:pector reviewed the procedure changes and discussed

-+/-h:e.:)7,rnbl:e:m::witt.i licensee personnel and determined that they

• h:azl r.e:c-ei-v,:e.ti.the :designated training and were knowledgeable of the

-:pr.o:bl£Ill_.Ra.s:e:cL:o:ri the above, this item is close.. 2 fI:J.:G:s:e:d)

U:mr:es:o1v~ed I tern ( 50-272/86-07-01 and 50-:- ~ 11/86-07-:-_01).

l4:c:et1:S'.eE :pT..O:CEri:r.m:e GMS-EMP-005, Design Calculations, did not address

-:ttr.e r£:q.uir:e:ment:s :of ANSI N45.2.9 for collection, storage and main-tie:llia:r.iu :of.l:ju:ali:t.y assurance record GMS-EMP-005 has been changed

.to ~r:.e:cj:uire *-:t+u~- En:gi neeri ng and Pl ant Betterment ( E&PB) Contra ls and

~C:oJ'.l:f-:i:gllr.atjrm Ma:nzagement Group to send legible copies of all calcula-

t:'.iTm:s-f-01--liiiriuti'lming to the Control Records Facility per the Vice-f'.r..e:s-:i:cfrent

't~lll:i:l,e:a-r (VPN) Procedure - MSP-07, Records Managemen A r:ew'li:ew.. ::of :th:e::sf!.::p<rocedures and discussions with licensee personnel by

t'b:e *rn:s:p:er:t:Dr ::iT.l:dicate that the licensee is now complying with the

"i:r,r:t.eJtr+/-:; :Of ~'A.:J\\{SJ: w.i::s. 2. 9.

• 0

• :S:al-e-rn.. G.eY:J-:er;a:t:ing Station, (SGS) Final Safety Analysis Report,

.i6=f:SAR}.,:Reifj:sion 6, Section 17.2, Quality Assurance During the

]):p-era't"i D'fl :s ;P'hn s e

• 0

'3illi"Tie:ct.miuil Specifications (TS), Unit 2, Section 6.0,

~1i.t!mi"lli:strati-¥ie Controls

'~IMSI *N::rn~7~-T976, Administrative Controls and Quality

~.:SJ.Jr3"n:c:e*f:or the Operational Phase of Nuclear Power Plants

.,.

'.7m5J '.N. 4:5_2_12-1977, Requirements for Auditing of Quality-A:s:s:.i.mam:-e<Pr-o:grams for Nuclear Power Pl ants

-*

-~J 'N.45.:2_23-1978, Qualifications of Quality Assurance

• =P'rngr:trm Aud:a Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants

• °'

l'J:u::C:l;::ar. Qual*i~ty Assurance (NQA) Department Manual, GM9-l,

o

ua li

ty. As :s:i:rr:a n c e S e ct i o n 1 -1, Rev i s i on 5 a n d S e ct i o n 7 -1,

-Tue.w,i.s i 1!l1l. 3

• I-Jr:: ~hisp.ert.ors reviewed Quality Assurance (QA) administrative

.,a%Jil ~:i11rp1:eme:nt i ng procedures to verify the fo 11 owing:

..

7:l:ra:L:.t.he scope of the audit program had been defined and tbn1.i~ was consistent with FSAR commitments and TS TiE:q~uiT:e men t s.

-~

1ii:at.*-rcesponsibilities had been assigned in writing for the

mv~ll management of the audit program including:

• :netermining the adequacy of the qualifications of

• =.au di t personnel

.D.etermining the need for special training of audit

• q:J:ersonne l

• ,::Qetermi ni ng the independence of audit personnel and/or

• i~nclusion of special expertise

E'.i:1suring corrective actions are taken for deficiencies

• t:dentified during audits D:etermining when re-audits are required

~]£suing audit reports to management

.. JR:evi ewi ng peri odi cal ly the audit program to.determine its status and adequacy

~~reparing long-range audit plans or schedules T:h--:ai.. +/-*h-e audited organization was required to respond in

~'1"311!) to audit findings, clearly stating the corrective

.::a"e:.Li:DTI taken or planned to prevent recurrenc Tha"t:the distribution requirements for audit reports and

.:c.DiF.f'!E:c:tive action responses had been define ~1ra:t :r::heck lists or procedures were required to be used in

-.:the ~p,erformance of audit ':rh.'a'i,.:t*h*e checklist for TS audits included verification that

' -:r:5:r.hi:a,n:ges had been trans 1 ated into appropriate procedures

.J:IT.l!:l xsurve i 11 an ce s.

"The ~T'Dcedu:res listed in Attachment 1 were reviewed to verify that :the.ab:ove criteria and regulatory requirement were in

• .r::omtili:ance :with each other.

..3:...2.:.2 Drg?.'.ni7at4m Review rne :~h:.i:cJeaT:Quality Assurance, (NQA) group consisted of nine

..l:Eil.d ~~di:tnTs and two Auditor Outside contractor technical

.:s;p:eci.31is+/-.s were used to help support technical audit At the

time :irl:.*thi.:£ inspection, the licensee had assigned for 1987

• eleV*-eTJl:;:t-er:tmical specialists to eleven different audit :A-p:pr~:rjma~e3y 42 audits had been schedule iAm.am:l'J:t :sr.hedule is prepared every two years with lead and s:up:p:o:rtin-g :auditors assigned and briefed about six months prior

tn~+/-h.e.:audi Auditors therefore have sufficient lead time to

pr..e-.p:an* f:or upcoming audit Am:!1-t1J*r D.ualification and Training l"t.re Yj~l4fi:r:ations and training of eleven full time auditors and i:ViY.o :p.:art "i:i'.me auditors were checked by the inspector and found

tID.:B:e 113 :c:rrmpliance with ANSI 45.2.23 requirement Potential

a;.crdi

t.TJ'r-:s :.t:o the NQA group are given one week 1 s training at the

tr..C:i1:riY1g.r::e:nter on codes, Federal requirements, audit tech-il*i.ri11:e.:s:.,.et.:c_

They are then required to prepare and conduct a

.:si:m11J.:a.t.erJ,.<u1dit, which is videotape Video results are re-

'i'"i:ew.e:cLwith the candidate to point out deficiencies and positive

aitTi:hu-t-e:s..

Based upon a candidates technical backgro.und and experience, schooling results, and video tape review, a decision js-*ma:de* on.whether to make the candidate an audit.o "'.h:e li.:c:eTJ:sr.e has an on-going training program to assist the

• iairdinlf:s i11 *the performance of their task Input to this 1:T..ai-ni*J'.g~*:prr.gram is either from the auditors requesting addi-

tiDTiii1'*"tT.iriTiing, or QA supervisors that see the need based on

..aJ.irlit.D'f,*p.e*riormance or program deficiencie Several of the

.a.u:dit:or:s w.ere participating in a 24 week Systems Engineering

.r::o.ur:s:E :.d-E.si:g-ned to give the auditor a broad view of plant opera-

• -:ti..on:s_: *:El.e:v'"en of the scheduled 42 audits in 1987 require the

..u:s:e uL:s:p:&1alist QA supervisors decide to use a specialist whftn *the subject of the audit requires specific expertise (i.e.,

fill:dinl:ogi:wil Protection/Chemistry, Radwaste, Fi re Protection).

lJs.uallw ttte specialists are contracted from General Physics

- L.n..rnµ.a'.f.l~-

.:S-.pecialists that participate in an audit attach a copy

of'1::h:e:i.r.T*e:sume (to verify qualifications) to the audit report.

• 3. *

The Tj:censce::e has two management programs for monitoring the

Nm:]:eif_,:Qu:a'J.ity Assurance (NQA) Audit progra The Offsite

5:af:e:t3hRe\\ri1.ew (OSR) Group receives copies of all completed

.aJJ:dii::s ;:and :a semiannual report of the overa 11 status of the E.J.Idi:t:pyog:mms effectivenes The inspector reviewed the "NQA

QA A!.:rdi:t.s BToup Status Report and Summary for 198 The number nf ::axrdi:t.s*:c:ompleted, the types of audits completed (functional

.:or D~::a.niz.:a::tional) and the number of findings for each audit was in:c11:ltiED in *the repor In addition, the OSR requests certain alr.di+/-:s:,;a:nd :participates in some audit [Note:

See NRC combined i=n:s:p:ertn*on *report 50-272/87-25 and 50-311/87-27 for additional ria-E.il'e:d i'.n-formation of the OSR Group.]

-Ammally a:n'outside organization performs a review of Salem 1 s Ellrli-:t :prog-.r:a This outside organization is a cooperative TI!iJ.:n:a:g:e:m:ent :group consisting of representatives of other nuclear

pmv--.er :plar.rt 1companie They perform a two week review of the ra.ur:di'.'i :pTogr:a The inspector reviewed the 1985 and 1986 Coopera-

• d:~;e -'M;i.*ffag~me n t Audit Re po rt s.

These reports we re deta i l ed and

-'h.~1t!E.:a:rr-in~f_ul finding The 1986 Audit followed up on the

.p-f'.i::¥i.o;.u:S ~a~rs audit findings as well as inspected new areas.

]~-rs ;a*cb:fk:t1:o:iJ., the NQA Group has developed a Master Audit Pl an

~ni:c:h i::s_u5:Ed for establishing audit schedules and developing im:i:j-y-j;d:1f.al a:udit plan For each audit a matrix has been ri~m:;el:o;p::ed wl:fi ch i dent i fies the required frequency of the audit,

~

irP:Plica:b:le regulatory requirements, the procedures affected,

a

r.rd

t:lire~ :sc-n*ve of the au di t.

AudH Sc-hedul e lt:J:e---4Ti:s:pecto-rs reviewed the 1987-1988 audit schedule and

e-.rifi£ci*thai the licensee 1 s schedule was in compliance with-i

h-Ei'l" "T:.-ectmi:cal Specification requirements for types and fre-

• qli'ET.l:Cg.Df -<3.:udit In addition the inspectors reviewed the

~:c:cm.rpJ:.e"°.cied ;audit reports listed in Attachment 1 and verified the

.aurlii:.:s -w.er:e ::completed per schedul "T'E:C'b:r:rtc..a~ :.S:p:ecifications (TS) audits are controlled so that each ii:.:e:m-.:of:JS-.w'illl be reviewed at least once every 5 to 7 year Audi::t-+flan:s for TS audits are sent to the OSR group for their-r:eN'i*:e.w -:prirn* to the audit.

• • 3.3A Audi"t :Jmplementat ion ThE -'i'T.l:Spect:o'.rs reviewed the audits 1 i sted in Attachment 1 and

• *.;;erifiied tfre fo 11 ow i n g :

"'

C:iliec-kl4:sts were used which prOvi ded sufficient information

.amd :9.lt.i:dance to the auditor to ensure sufficient in-depth

~nevi:ew :o*f an area without restricting the auditors action ce

':QA:p.rn;g'.r!:am requirements were clearly identified for each

cb:e.ckT:ist i tern *tro:n:c:oTJTO'.rmances identified during the audit were well rio~.umea~Ed and meaningfu :P..Ormal Action Requests resulting from audit findings were i.:s.:s.u.erl*i::o the audited organization in a timely manne =

Al:irJTt~IE~orts were issued to the audited organization in a u':mely 1llanner.

...,,

~ii:. ~r::e:ports format and contents met regulatory

-~ri..ui'neme n ts.

hi.adoni:o'f:l ".a"'n inspector accompanied an auditor performing a

f:JlOr:t:i:oJ:l Df '.t~M-87-26, Outage Audi The inspector reviewed the

mrli"U

Jr:s.aird"h package, verified the auditor was properly

q

Llill-5.*fi::e:d *:t:o *~perform the audit, verified the auditor fo 11 owed

a:cimj*n-Jstr~a:th5e controls when traveling throughout the plant, and w£Ti*fl~e:d :i:.*h:e ::auditor performed an adequate review of outage

~el-:a:i-Fd-lr'i'~l'(J*~*ng activities for compliance to regulatory req ti 1 re1'1rerr ~'P.iY Ia.1:I:di1 f1TJnings result in one of three types of Action

• R:e:q1ie:s:t:S '-(;l~,:~) ~being writ ten:

Qua l i ty Action Request ( QAR),

..C:orrFtii:v-e ::A:ct ion Request (CAR) or Management Action Request (:MAtt.)_

• • A:r}JH~ is the lowest level of AR and a MAR is the tri.:gnE-sL.:Drn'.ft copies of the AR are given to the audited TI'.l'1J3,'Tlizati.ur;i<at the exit meetin This initiates a 25 working

.-rray r:Jm:k 0by,.which the audited organization must respon *F.nil11-P:e~;t1rr-:e:spond in that ti me frame or providing an inadequate

• ne...'J):o:n:siE r:e3:11J ts in the AR being reissued and e sea 1 a ted to a fr:i:gfre*T'_'.lnan.o:g*:ement level i.e., QARs are reissued as CARs and CARs

.E'l"'E -r:.e--J:s:suerl :'as MAR The NQA group issues about 3 MARs per

~/'.!~ilT-Th:eJi[Q'A. group performs four follow-up audits each yea *The *n1,1.ow-11;p audits are used to verify AR responses and formally

.:C:Jos:e-o:ut th'.~ open i tern The inspectors reviewed the AR

p:ar:ka:g-:e:s lts:ted in Attachment 1 to verify timeliness of issue, T*E:s-pm:i:s:e* an:d~:close-out, adequacy of the response and managements

• invnlw*:e:ment. 'Mith the response.

.. Li':cEil:S:eE -.prn:cedur:e QAP 7-1 requires a response date of not greater

tha:n l'5 wor:k day:s-for the audited organization to respond to a

.Quali-:ty.Act:fon Re:C!JUest (QAR), Corrective Action Request (CAR), or a MaJlil.~EmEnt lrctioTI.Request (MAR).

ANSI N45.2.12 (1977) states that

.:a1I11-:t:h:e£V*Efil ttie:corrective action cannot be completed within 30

• ~rlay:s.., *::the *.a:u:d:i t:erl ' organ i z at i on s re s po n s e sh a 11 i n cl u de a sch e du l e

da1.~ *for :t:h:e*.corr~ective 2ction.

In Section 17.2.2 of the FSAR item nt:rlIID:eT 17., the l'i:tensee commits to ANSI N45.2.1 Below are a list

• .nf.a.-c:t:jnn 1"'£D.*ue.s:ts that failed to meet the above mentioned criteri "MlrBE-:CDJ:&-J

- '51FBr:CD2D

. :SA*:BJ'...;:0D3B

' MA*..:ff6~:CD27 MA=:&7"o=I:DD£

'Mk-B'.&-IDD7 MA-13£-:CDDB

'Mk-BE-I:DlD

-:MA-_:s-7..;. 1'1Dll2 D.aie Response RE.qui red T0-14-87 9'-3.7-87-3--3. 7-87 l-30-87 TCF 17-86 lir 17-86 JD..:17-86 1:0-17-86

5--:J. 3-87 Date Response Received 10-28-87 10-21-87 10-21-87 2-17-87 11-5-86 11-5-86 11-5-86 10-6-86 5-12-87 Date Response Accepted Open 10-27-87 10-27-87 2-20-87 11-19-86 11-17-86 11-19-86 11-14-86 6-12-87 Tne lii:eTr5'e:e *hat! identified the lack of timeliness in the AR-response program and as a result, had recently added the AR program to the

• 'I:ammi"i:tn:eJ:rt Tr.ack4i:ig System (CTS).

The CTS is a monthly printout of

.. :o:p-e:i:i 1-:t.:em.s.w:hi:i.ch., 'among other things, tracks and highlights overdue

"r:e:s:p:OOJ:s:e:s.i::o*opEJJ item Copies of the CTS monthly reports are sent

.:to i:t:re SeTii n"r Vtc..-e P re s i de n t - N u c l ea r a n d o th e r up p e r l e v e l

~iilmiag.em:e11*t_ -:Th:e licensee expects this will help assure better

• i:im.e lin~:s:s *r:esprm};e to AR 'Sinrce :thi-:s :a+rp:anmt violation was identified by the licensee; would

h.a;l7<e:b:eET1 :a ievE1 IV or V violation; was in the process of being

~'CD~:e:d~ :.'i3::nd,.* w:a: s n o t a v i o l at i o n that c o u l d have re so n ab l y bee n

pr*EV-E'r.r:t:e:d :by *::t hE 1 i c e n s e e 1 s co r rec t i v e a c t i o n fo r a p rev i o u s v i o l a -

i:.i::o:1lo, -.tls.e ~:ove*'.jJ'.roblem is considered an unresolved item in order to

.:.allnw 1.inre to. determine the effectiveness of the corrective action

~t:a*k-En :by-ttre:lir:ce:r:isee in this area [50-272/87-31-01 and

• _

• • 5'D-31J/B7-:32~:01]..

4.. 0 Tran-Sfnrme*rs J\\N:SrN4:5_2.:9, Requirements for Collection, Storage, and

'Mai:T.rt.en:a:11c:e of Qua 1 i ty Assurance Records for Nuclear Power

• :Pl.a Te:ctmi.;c.:a1 :S:µiecifications, Section 3/4.8.1 AC Sources

Q.ua1ii:.y ;A:s:s:arance Procedure ( QAP) 3-1, Procurement Document

• .Revi*ew

. J~A-P :3-2.,.*.Supplier Evaluation/Approval

.rtA:P *4-1.,.-%:!:Ceiving Inspection IJi:c:.e :Pr£:s1ri:ent Nuclear Procedure MSP-07, Records Management

. rrrgi11e.e'riilg and Pl ant Betterment Dapartment ( E&PB) GM 8-EMP-005,

.D.e.:si gn * :e:a1r::i:.1 l at i on s

8.!J:ri*n:g :t:hi:s in:s:p::e.ction period the inspector reviewed the problems and

i::orr:e:c:tiw:.e :artirrn.s taken by the 1 ice n see in addressing the Generator N.:a411 Tr~rTirl:orrm~r.:s (GMTs) and Station Power Transformers (SPTs)

-f~j,J~l1'1'.'~-

..'S".h1:c-:e:the GMTs problems are common for the Salem Units 1

.trr:r.:d2 :am:l*ihxplEi.J>reek Generating Stations, the inspector reviewed and

• E.W$l.u:a1:etl.aTI ~7rgi*neeri ng approach that is common to a 11 GMTs at both

S"aJ:e:m.ri'.iJ..d * +/-lnp,id.Ire e k stat i on s.

• .lj_]_J

• P*r*E:S'E'rri.'.S-:t~r:t.u s Th--er:e '8.T'e *pr-esently eleven Westinghouse GMTs at both Salem and Hope Creek station The unit, position, name plate data,

.:s::eriil.1 *n..umbe\\r, service history and potential failure mechanisms

• .nf ;iiJl,el.e:v*e:n transformers are 1 i sted on Attachment There

an:.:s:e:vEJ.i.Btrr s at S a 1 em U n it s 1 a n d 2 a n d fo u r at Hope C re e k.

Si:x *of th:e :t'.ransformers at Salem are installed and operating

• whilt!.:"til:e<s:e;.venth has been removed from service due to a high

.i::a:i::e.!if ;ch:a:nge of combustible gas reading Three of the trans-inrrrrer:s :at. Hope Creek a re in servic The fourth exp 1 oded int.I:r.n:a1ly.:dllring a recent startup from an outage.

. Zl-.;3.:2 '_:GMT.:s :P.a:s+/-. ;Hi:s to ry

E:xx:l:udi"'.f.l'fr:t:h-E most recent event at Salem Unit 2, on two separate

.Dt::ea.:Sio:n:s*-i:he GMTs were removed from service because of a high

.ra'.t'E! :nf :cfraTJ:ge of combustible ga The first event was on Salem Unit. J "i'n::J977 and the second event was on Sa 1 em Unit 2 in 1981

• _;The :ama lys*l s performed by \\'Jest i nghouse Corporation at their

• Mun:ci-tefr Tr.arisformer Works on the two Salem Units found two

-::pro:bl:ems:

. :'Th.-cDre was in contact with the vertical member of the ICovr '11T 11 beam at three 1 ocat ion.

Etier£ *.were indications of heating in the short Low Voltage

{-.LV) EEries connection We:si:i111-gnn11:s-.e Shop inspections subsequently revealed that the T

.*":be-am +/-J.:e.ath1:g and LV lead heating was the cause for the increase in o"':il ;g.a:s:s4n The transformers were not considered by Westing-tmu:s~e.:a"t :ttl'at time to be on the verge of a catastrophic failure.

. :vJe::s:t'far.g*ho:u:si:e was aware of the T beam heating problem from field

..exp-.erj:enr::E *.;and it was the reason that two GMTs were removed from

.:s-er-:v-5:t'E i11198 Westinghouse, with licensee concurrence, felt thi:s.w:as.=a :preventative measure that should be fol lowed when it was ]~dEni~iied that the gas in the oil was increasing. The

tT3TI:S-fDT'lm:T~ were repaired and returned to servic :JL3~.3 .GITT s =F&e:r:-em Events Thre mu:s-:t *r:e:cent event at. Salem Unit 2 involved the phase 1 GM Ji:.\\*a-S T£ITIDNed from service due to a high rate of change of

c:omb.us:t:i:bT.e gas in the transformer oi This transformer is

.r;J;Jrr!E'J:r+/-l,¥*1:n dry layu Westinghouse has informed the licensee

~n2~ The ~r.:obable cause of the high rate of change of combust-1:bl.e ~:as i*n the oil (much greater than the previous two GMTs-r-:emn;v~e:d f-rnm service in 1977 and 1981) and the 1 arge total-p-en:.e:m:a-g;e.,()f combustible gas is more likely to be due to a LV lead heatin~ problem rather than a T beam heating proble The r-:e:r:~,.:-Ev-:en:t at Hope Creek involved a catastrophic failure

{in:t:eri.JaJ...e,xplosion) of the phase 1 GMT during the October 13, JBB7 :pl.a1J'i.:startup from an outag Analysis of oscillograph tia~~ ~Y tne licensee indicated that a High Voltage (HV) phase to

g*rm.:.1*/J.d:"f.a:uh occurre The inspector reviewed the data and

.iil:dE+teii:d:ent.fy verified this findin The 1 i cen see at the ti me nf t.l'iri3 i~:s~ection had not determined the cause of the GMT

failrr.r:;e_

~*The transformer was not repairable and a spare GMT has

.:b:e:E"n i1'.l:staTJed as a replacemen ~.. :3.4 --:-f raTI:sfnrmEr Monitoring Sys terns

• "Tnm:o:1;rttn*r:.the GMTs for both Hope Creek and Salem Units 1 and 2,

.-tfre liJ:e11:sce:e has purchased a We sting house Transformer Monitoring

S-yst:e-m:{TM:S).

The TMS is a gas in oil monitor that continuously

• re.arls-tflE level of gas in the oil and transmits the data every

twelve.:.hour.s to a monitoring displa Another system the licensee i:s :planning to emp 1 oy is the Westinghouse Corona AJ:ousti:c System, \\*JECAS, for a power transforme The WECAS

sy.:stem,ident-:ifies corona discharge within the transformer during

.:tite Ol)eratto*n of the Uni The monitoring unit consists of an filirp li.fi:er *.arrd programmab 1 e acoustic emmi ssi on analyzer that

.:d1:!:tert.s~~cnr.ana discharges in oi The recording of corona

dt:scn:a*r:ge :an:d the samp 1 i ng of trans former oi 1 a re the two methods th:at.:the Ti*c.--ensee plans to use in determining the condition of

the 11ine* operating GMTs for Salem Units 1 and 2 and Hope Cree "T*hE *1n:stalla:tion and operation of the vJestinghouse TMS and WECAS

systEm:s.were not scheduled during this inspection perio.A. S:al:e-m Units l.and 2 Station Power Transformers (SPTs)

.T!'J..e "twri'SFT.s...ar:e..General Electric 3 phase transformer, class DAlFAlfDA_

The *S:PTs are part of the yard ring-bus system at the Siil£In.:si.te anri t.r:ansform the 500 kv line voltage to 13.8 kv for use

. :vrt+/-.:hi n S.a 1 em Uni t:s l a n d 2.

The o i 1 g a s a n a l y s i s i n s p e c t i o n o f t he JJn+/-t J :s~1 indi~3ted a high concentration of gas within the oil

gr::e;a::t;er.*t:h:a'.n 90D:p:pm while the Unit 2 SPT was less than 700pp Based D1l +/-+/-i:e lJnii.'J'SPT gas level reading, the licensee plans to drain its

..2£.,'.DBB 1:J.c.1lm:is "Df oil and put it through a cleaning progra After e:c!he:a:rri"ITg *t:h:e.oil., the SPT wi 11 be refi 11 ed and teste The purging

O'f :th:E *sPT Dil w.as scheduled to start on November 2, 1987 and be r::mrrpl:e:ted in...a:p:prnximately 84 hour9.722222e-4 days <br />0.0233 hours <br />1.388889e-4 weeks <br />3.1962e-5 months <br /> The gas levels in the SPT oil

• w:e:r£,1,*r:'.i:ttri:n *ttve *111dustry standards for a transformer of its ag The

• • l,:ev:el.:s i:dEn:tifierl by the licensee did not indicate that there was any

.Yiei-:er:t 1.Yit:h4-n. thr.e 'transform er sys ter HmrE.:s:olw..e:d ii::em:s 'ar.e*ma:tters about which more information is required in

o:r.tle:r :t:o '6.:sI:-Er:t.3.i :n * whet.'h er they a re a c ce p tab l e i terns, i terns of 11'.0'l'.l:CD'.lrrpli:a.T.1:c:e.,

.or*rlEYi~a-tion One unresolved item was identified during

t:he "~:n:s:p:ertiDTI *.an:d i.s ri'iscussed in section l:hE i1J:s.-p-:ertnr.s 11li=twith the Salem staff on October 30, 1987, to discuss

t:h:e *:s:co:p:E.* :aml fiT1tii:*rrg:s :as de ta i 1 ed in th i s repor The l ice n see rep re-

.:sECTi.a:tjv£!..:S.ar:knowl,e.dgE.d the inspectors 1 finding :;A;t"rro*i:ime JJi1ri1l!J* i:hi.:s inspection was written material provided to the

]*.i:cE1i:s:e:e~:b}J ::ti1E ins:pe:cto The licensee did not indicate that any

pr:o:prirto.-ry 'i11fnrnra:ti_D"n was ut i l i zed during th i s inspection.

Attachment 1

.'Q:i:ra l:i"ty 'A"'S*s:rrra*m::e.:Pro:cedure s Reviewed

• QA'.P TB., 1te~n:s1;oTI :S., ** Q:tJa l i ty Audi ts

• Q~P J:E., R:e\\V'.i::SiDTI :5., C:0rrect i ve Action

CtffP.1.,

RE;-vi:s:'.in~n B., :pu:a l i ty Program

Q~P 7-J., :Rewi:si:o:n :.S..,

~Corrective Action

"Q'A'P -

• i

"R

-

..

2.. J d A l

.

• rx 1-...., *:.. '"-B'X'l-..SJ.:c,.,

• ren na ys1 s

"NN.-B7-Dl:S

.:NM **B7-'.UZ5

'.ti!M. :BE-D.lB NM:BE-D.34

• =FnlJnW".'":Up Audit

• *_:Q*'.4. * £:n:g5*n e e r i n g

-':S:aJ-:em :and Hope Creek Technical Sta ff

• -~Research and Testing Laboratory

• • £m.eT:g:eTi:cy Preparedness

• * * J..:e:cih'.rii:ca l Engineering

• *~~n;g'jTI:e:eri ng and Pl ant Betterment T.e:c'hr1i:c:a1 Spec if i cations

• >Pr.D:o.Jr:e*me n t and Material Control

• .:c:o~r:rE:cti ve Action Nuclear Department

• <M!r-'.B:&-:IDJ:E

.. :'Mk-:&:6~:CTJI6,;.. l

. '*MA-JQ-;?[O:.ff2

MA-m-rDJll

.. :MA=--F.?= :ems

.:MA-:W-::C.IT23

• 'MA-Bd-'.QD3:9

• s.k-:er:c:aZ :-s~:8J*";:Q:o:m

• * *-:MA=fl§= :CBJ~tii

• :MJ:F:at=mD'

.,Mk'.:13:&-.:cnm;

• 'MA-B-S~I.DJTl

.<MH:&-rm::r~

• 'MA-:8V-:CDD:9

• l~&-:c:oi'Ul

Attachment 1

llNif N si>.tE:t>J Oi SALtM Oi

§~LEM ui SALEM U2 SALEM U2 SALEM U2 SALEM PHl PH2 PH3 N/A HOPE CREEK PHl HOPE CREEK PH2 Att~i::h~~nt 2

~Ai.tM i A~~ cl ANb ~ti~t. tikt£k tlr1Ntt{A tci~ f.iA 1 M t~Ai-lstti~Mt~ i ~ b1>t~At i ~ci ~ H1tt>~v A~ti ~ r ~i< As~t:ssMtN+

SAME SAME SAME SAME 6tttiAL t.Yoi:Jfo49 7001679 7001790 7001792 10, FOA SHELL FORM 7002771 362500KVA 500,000 GRDY/288750VHV SAME

~k~vttJt ~t~+ti~~

~~~R~~~ff~~~~f~~EMkNr

~AR hP

-,*MiF.:st:~+ ~tos. **

si'AWr t v

• . *.

• .

REMOVED FROM SERVICE T BEAM HTG/LEAD HTG CORRECTED, RETURNED TO SERVICE AUG 87 JAN 77 -

MAR 78 REMOVED FROM SERVICE 01 Ul T BEAM HTG/LEAD HTG CORRECTED RETURNED TO SERVICE DEC 82 OCT 82-PRESENT PLUS START UP OCT 81 AUG 87 PLUS START UP REMOVED FROM SERVICE HIGH GAS NEVER ENERGIZED AT STATION FEB 87-PRESENT PLUS START UP rii\\ILUht Mtb~

• :*

. ~...

'..,, *

' !

~ *.

T BEAM HTO U:A(j IHti UNKNOWN UNKNOWN T BEAM HTG LEAD HTG T BEAM HTG LEAD HTG UNKNOWN UNKNOWN T BEAM HTG AND LEAD HTG PROBLEMS CORRECTED IN DESIGN OF NEWER TRANSFORMER T BEAM HTG AND LEAD HTG PROBLEMS CORRECTED IN DESIGN OF NEW TRANSFORMER

. *.'

• ~~~

Att~cH~eHl ~ !bdHlid. i ijALtM i.A~b ~ A~ti ~ti~~ bhttk btNtk~to~ MXi~ +"AMs~ti~Mk~i~ ti~t~AtiMti ~iatti~~ A~b ~i~~ A~t~~~Mt~+ *

u~it N ~b~itl.o~ ij~~t~L~t ~t~IAL Nd1

~~~vi~tr* ~H~Hm~*

~2fEH~~Ahtti~

~tM~~k~.

HDft tkktk

~id iliillit

-~-

t~Miii~iih~~~ ~clfo bMRAllRli iHB~~~[+~t=o"tn; "+"

~u~g~oR~r"Ew Rb~f tAHK

~/ §~M~

.:.---..---.......... ~~--'--

'~~i';J M~~sif~i~~i*~-**- '"

a.1id;;:::.1~aa. ~,.

n_...

J

• ~.~ h!:::,iia'"iili;;:a t..aat:i

.....

',r.I,',*, *:i,

,',..

• ,

1,:.*

,:... *.***

.;.: