IR 05000387/1985034
| ML17146A203 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 12/11/1985 |
| From: | Anderson C, Paulitz F, Woodard C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17139D334 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-387-85-34, 50-388-85-30, NUDOCS 8512180305 | |
| Download: ML17146A203 (10) | |
Text
U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Region I 50-387/85-34 Report Nos.
50-388/85-30 50-387 Docket Nos.
50-388 NFP-14 License Nos.
NFP-22 Pri ority Category C
Licensee:
Penns lvania Power and'Li ht Com an 2 North Ninth Street Allentown Penns lvania 18101 Facility Name:
Sus uehanna Steam Electric Station Unit 1 and
Inspection At:
Berwick Penns lvania Inspectors:
Inspection Conducted:
November 4-8 1985 c(a P F.
P. Paulitz, Reac or Engineer C.
H. Woodard, Re ctor Engineer
/a /r f'>
date
/~ rr Pi date Approved By:
C. J.
nder on, Chief, Plant System Section, DRS date Ins ection Summar
Ins ection on November 4-8 1985 Ins ection Re ort Nos.
50-387/85-34 and 50-388/85-30 A~:
of electrical and control activities relating to the installation of the "E" diesel generator and associated electrical equipment.
The inspection involved 90 hours0.00104 days <br />0.025 hours <br />1.488095e-4 weeks <br />3.4245e-5 months <br /> on site by two region based inspectors.
Results:
No violations were identified.
512180305 851213 DR ADOCK 05000387'DR
DETAILS 1;0 Persons Contacted Penns lvania Power and Li ht Com an PP&L
~ T. Crimmins, Superintendent of Plant
~ J.
Graham, Senior Compliance Engineer G. Stanly, E&S Construction
- D. McGann, Compliance Engineer R. Prego, Operation QA Supervisor
- H. Stokes, Senior Project Engineer QA T. Roche, Lead Project Supervisor (Plant Engineering Group Leader)
- R. Pedigo, System Test Engineer M. Swicki, Installation Engineering Group R.
Smoley, Electrical Engineer Project Construction
" R.
Schwarz, Supervising Engineer Project Construction R. Smith, NQA Contractor G. Glorvigen, NQA Contractor D. Thompson, Assistant Superintendent of Plant 1.2 Dravo Constructors Inc.
DCI W. Gaines, General Superintendent P. Antonich, QC Engineer R. Becker, Project Engineer S.
Bean, PM Supervisor R. Alvarado, Project Manager 1.3 United States Nuclear Re ulator Commission
- R. Jacobs, Senior Resident Inspector
" Denotes those present at exit meeting.
2.0 Modification to Class 1E Electrical S stem 2.1
~Back round II The Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (SSES),
Units 1&2, Class 1E electrical system receive their power input at four 4. 16KV busses associated with each unit
~
The Standby Emergency Diesel Generators (EDG) A, B, C,
& D are shared between each unit.
Each EDG can supply power to both its respective Unit 1 or Unit 2 bus.
Should any of the four EDGs become inoperable, the Technical Specification action statement requires that EDG to be made operable within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> or place both units in Hot'tandby.
The licensee has designed and is constructing a modification to provide greater operating flexibility.
This modification is a
new EDG "E" that can be used as a direct replacement for any of the existing four EDGs should they become inoperabl.2
~Sco e
The scope of this inspection included the electrical systems and components of the "E" EDG; and power transfers and control transfers necessary to use the "E" EDG in place of any of the four existing EDG's.
2.3 Ins ection Pur ose and Criteria The purpose of this inspection was to ascertain that:
the design changes and modification were in conformance with the requirements of
CFR 50.59; the electrical system component,s were received, stored and installed in accordance with approved procedures and drawings; the procedures and drawings agree with the FSAR commitments; activ-ities were monitored by QC personnel; and that QC activities were audited by QA personnel.
The documents reviewed during this inspection are listed in Appendix A.
2.4 Modification Control and Safet Evaluation Design changes are controlled by "Plant Modification Design Control Procedure
"AD-QA-411.
These changes were reviewed in accordance with the procedure requirements.
A composite Safety Evaluation No.
3544-GD-002 describes the scope,,
arrangement of Plant Modification Requests/Design Control Package (PMRs/DCPs) installation/construction and a brief description of the DCPs.
PMR No. 83-812/DCP, No. 83-812A, BEC "4.16 KV and Control System Modification and Transfer Scheme" Safety Evaluation was reviewed.
The Safety Evaluation was approved by the Plant Operating Review Committee (PORC).
This evaluation covered three phases of implemen-tation of PMR 83-812.
The following was noted by the inspector:
Phase A includes the work which is performed prior to entering a limiting condition of operation (LCO).
This is all work asso-ciated with implementation of DCP 83-812A.
The installation of transfer panels, cables, switchgear, raceway and terminal boxes does not affect the functional capability of any safety related circuit.
Phase B includes the work performed during a
LCO.
Phase B work is the work associated with the implementation of DCP 83-812B.
The Phase B work includes a tie in of the equipment installed in Phase Phase C includes the work which is performed to tie-in the "E" diesel generator to the transfer points which were installed during the Phase A activities.
Phase C work is all work asso-ciated with the implementation of OCP83-812C.
The Phase C installation operationally ties the existing EDGs as modified by Phase AN to the additional EDG "E".
The licensee stated that the modification does not create the possibility for an accident or malfunction of a type different pre-viously evaluated in the FSAR.
The licensees bases are:
The basic EOG power distribution and control/instrumentation design have not been changed.
The power, control and instrumentation systems of the EDG being replaced are utilized by EDG "E".
All new equipment is Class 1E and seismically supported.
Tie-in cables and re-routed existing cables are Class 1E and are run in raceways which are seismically supported.
The FSAR separation requirements have been maintained for re-routed cables/conduits and new tie-in cables/conduits.
Some existing cables have been re-routed to allow physical installation of the new tie-in cables; however, they functionally remain the same.
The inspector did not identify any areas where the modification creates a possibility for an accident or malfunction of a type different from those previously.evaluated in the FSAR.
The inspectors review included the documents in Appendix A and a visual inspection of the systems and components associated with this modification.
The licensee plans to submit changes to both the Technical Specification and the FSAR to reflect this modification.
2.5 Recei t Ins ection-Stora e
The electrical components were received and stored in a PP5L warehouse.
This is a Class A storage facility.
Components are moved from the warehouse as required for installation.
The switchgear breakers will remain in the warehouse unti'1 the system is ready for testin No deficiencies were identified with respect to inspection and storage of the electrical equipment.
2.6 In-lace Stora e
The Dravo Constructors, Inc. (DCI) Construction Site Procedures (CSP)
were reviewed for storage, handling and preventive maintenance of electrical components for the "E" EDG facility.
This review was to determine compliance with licensee modification control and FSAR commitments.
The storage, handling and preventive maintenance pro-cedures requirements were compared to quality records and verified by visual inspection.
The quality records are discussed in paragraph 2.8.
The inspector observed that the electrical equipment was pro-tected from ongoing construction activities and the electrical space heaters were energized inside the EDG generator.
The equipment within the existing EDG buildings was also protected.
The power and control cables, which were not terminated, were pro-tected by a protective wrap.
The 12 power cable reels that were stored in the "B" EDG building had a protective cover on them.
The inspection logs indicate that the required space heaters are energized and the motors are given periodic insulation megger tests.
No deficiencies were identified.
2.7 Installation The electrical equipment procurement specifications, installation procedures and drawings listed in Appendix A were reviewed for com-pliance with modification control, safety evaluation and FSAR commit-ments.
The technical requirements were compared to the existing plant equipment technical requirements for compatibility.
The installation procedures and drawings were used to determine if the electrical equipment was being installed as required by the procedures and drawings.
The inspector noted that the method of anchoring the 125 volt dis-tribution panel to the foundation differed from the drawing E198389
"E" Building Equipment Foundation Details'iscussions with the licensee indicated that the original design had interference problems between the anchor bolts and the panel frame.
A Non-Conformance Report (NCR) No.
198 had been issued to identify and correct the problem.
It was determined that the installation requirements did not specify a torque value for the nut on the anchor bolts.
Further, it was determined that the torque values of nuts for anchor bolts for the other electrical equipment had not been specified.
This deficiency of not specifying a nut torque value is considered an unresolved issue 387/85-34-01 and 388/85-30-01.
This item will remain open until the
licensee has established the necessary torque values to be applied to the anchor nuts for the electrical equipment.
This issue applies to cast in-place anchor bolts.
The manufacturer for Hilti bolts specifies minimum and maximum torque values to be applied to anchor nuts.
The inspector confirmed that the sill welds and the weld from the equipment to the si lls for the control transfer panel, EDG "A" building, were performed in accordance with Drawing C904 "Mounting of Switchgear and Transfer Panel".
The inspector confirmed that the installed power and control cables were identified by their respective color code and the raceway trays and conduits were identified by their alpha designators.
No other deficiencies were identified in the area.
2.
~1i A
The licensee gA personnel associated with the "E" EDG Facility were interviewed by the inspector.
There were indications of an insuf-ficient number of Oravo Construction, Inc. (DCI) quality control personnel initially assigned to the project.
Although this has been corrected, it has created a backlog of corrective rework.
The inspector reviewed inspection logs including selective survei 1-lance reports, preventive maintenance records, non-conformance reports, PP&L gA audits of DCI, DCI response to these audits and PP&L close out of DCI's corrective action.
The documents reviewed are listed in Appendix A.
The inspector conducted a review of quality related documents relative to electrical components and systems, along with visual observations, independent measurements and calculations to ascertain whether these reflect work accomplishment consistent with NRC requirements and the licensee FSAR commitments.
No deficiencies were identified in this area.
2.9 Inde endent Measurements and Calculations E ui ment Mountin The inspector measured the fillet weld radius, length of weld and spacing of welds for the transfer control panel, EOG "A" building.
The welds were used to secure the panel sill to the foundation plate and the panel to the sill.
These measurements were in agreement with drawing details shown on Drawing C904,
"Mounting of Switchgear
& Transfer Panel".
Also measured were selected foundation bolt spacing for the EDG "E" Control Panel.
These measurements were in agreement with the details shown on Drawing E107172 "Diesel Generator
"E" Building Equipment Foundation Details".
2.9.2 Emer enc Diesel Generator Leads The inspector performed measurements and calculations to determine the adequacy of the new EDG "E" power leads for ampacity and voltage drop.
The worst case EOG loading of 4556KW, taken from the pur-chase specification M-1082, was used as the bases for comparing the new EDG supply cable ampacity.
This ampacity was further reduced due to the installation of these cables in an earth barried duct bank'.
The duct bank consists of plastic conduits spaced by reinforced concrete.
The duct bank top is about 4 feet below grade.
The EDG has two 1000 MCM cables per phase which is routed from EDG "E" thru the switchgear transfer in the EDG "E" facility thru duct banks into the respective EDG "A", "B", "C" and "D" buildings.
Within the existing building, the cables enter two six inch conduits that cross the building then go vertical to the switchgear transfer which is located at the ventilation room elevation'he cables then go down to a pull box, located about 15 feet above the first floor, then to the existing bus connection point.
The total circuit length is estimated as 700 feet.
This length was used to determine the voltage drop.
The independent calculations of both the ampacity and voltage drop are provided in Appendix B.
2.9.3
~Findin s
The inspector did not identify any deficiencies with respect
'o the cable size selected by the licensee considering the cable ampacity and voltage drop.
The current output for the EDG worst case is 82% of the output cables derated ampacity.
The 10 volt cable drop between the "E" EDG and the existing bus connection is reasonable.
The operator can adjust the EDG voltage so that the voltage at the bus is 4, 160 volts.
The inspector noted that the welds and bolts examined for mounting the electrical equipment were in agreement with the installation drawings.
3.0 Interface The modification design, procurement and construction activities are con-trolled by PP&L Allentown.
All design and construction of the "E" EDG facility, outside of the secured area, was performed by Gibbs
& Hill, Inc.
and Dravo Constructors, Inc.
The design and procurement specifications were provided by Gibbs & Hill, Inc.
The construction was by Dravo Constructors, Inc.
The construction activities within the secured areas of units 1 and 2 were conducted by PP&L.
This activity is controlled by the Plant Modification Design Control Procedur.0 Status The "E" EDG facility structure is being completed for the tornado missile protection of the EDG exhaust.
Other tornado missile protection not complete is the building entrances and the air intake.
The fuel oil storage tank is installed with 50% of it covered.
The transfer pump and tank level structure is not constructed.
The diesel generator and auxiliary skid mounted equipment are in place.
The emergency service water piping is not connected to the EDG heat exchanger.
There is piping misalignment that requires correction.
The air compressors and storage tanks are in place.
The only electric equipment installed is the 4, 160 volt transfer switchgear and the control transfer panels.
The following electrical equipment was not installed:
EDG control panel EDG high voltage cabinet EDG synchronization panel Batteries 125 volt DC distribution panel Battery charger Non-1E motor control center Building auxiliary system control panel lE AC&DC motor control center with incoming breaker compt 480 volt 4, 160/480 volt load center transformer Fire protection panel Cathodic protection rectifier cabinet The cable tray and conduit raceway systems are incomplete with no wires installed.
The duct banks between the existing EDG building and the "E" EDG facility are completed from within the secured area to 10 feet within the unsecured area.
This is about 150 feet.
The power and control transfer equipment is installed in the "A" EDG building.
Twelve EDG power cables, 120 feet length, have been installed in the "A" and "C" EDG buildings.
The cables are stored on reels in the "B" EDG building.
Control cables have been installed in trays going between the new terminal boxes,. located below the existing control panels, to the new control transfer panel in "A", "B" and
"C" EDG buildings.
5.0 Unresolved Item Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, violations or deviations.
Unresolved items disclosed during the inspection is discussed in paragraph.0 Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in paragraph
on November 8, 1985 and summarized the purpose, scope and findings of the inspection.