IR 05000410/1985035
| ML17055A851 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 11/27/1985 |
| From: | Anderson C, Woodard C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17055A849 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-410-85-35, IEB-71-02, IEB-71-2, IEB-73-01, IEB-73-1, IEB-80-15, TEB-71-2, TEB-73-1, TEB-80-15, NUDOCS 8512040210 | |
| Download: ML17055A851 (16) | |
Text
0 U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-410/85-35 Docket No.
50-410 License No.
CPPR-112 Pri ority Category B
Licensee:
Nia ara Mohawk Power Cor oration 300 Erie Boulevard West S racuse New York 13202 Facility Name:
Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Station Unit 2 Inspection At:
Scriba New York Inspection Conducted:
October 28-November
1985 Inspectors:
C.
C Wo Approved by:
ard, Reactor Engineer date u ~ (
C.
. Anderson, Chief, PSS, DRS date Ins ection Summar
Inspection on October 28-November 1,
1985 (Report No. 50-410/85-35).
Areas Ins ected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of activities pertaining to the installation of safety related electrical equipment and the status of previous inspection findings.
The inspection involved 34 inspector hours on site by one region-based inspector Results:
No violations were identified 85if pQR ADGC~'DR
~fg0PoQf0
~000+f0'I
DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted 1. 1 Nia ara Mohawk Power Cor oration W. Baker, Lead Construction Engineer
- C. Beckman, Manager Quality Assurance B. Morrison, Quality Engineering Manager F. Osypiewski, Quality Assurance Engineer W. Hedzi k, Quality Assurance Engineer
~J. White, Special Projects Engineer
~T. Kolceski, Special Projects Engineer
'T. Lee, Special Projects Engineer
- G. Griffith, Site Licensing Engineer
"M. Ray, Special Pro'jects Manager
"C. Millian, Lead Engineer 1.2 Stone and Webster En ineerin Cor oration T. Baungartner, Site Quality Assurance Supervisor J. Bufis, Test Supervisor
"R. Hyslop, Site Licensing Engineer D. Student, Quality Assurance Engineer D. Grimsbo, Test Group Supervisor J.
Beverage, Quality Assuranc'e Engineer
"C. Terry, Project Quality Assurance Manager 1.3 U.S. Nuclear Re viator Commission
"L. Doerflien, Resident Inspector
- Denotes those present at the exit interview November 1,
1985.
2.0 Licensee Actions on Previous Ins ection Findin s
2. 1 Closed Construction Deficienc 85-00-17 regarding operating the emergency diesel generator
EGS'EG1 during test in excess of rated load capacity.
The inspector reviewed the following documentation:
Test Procedure MD.0100.AOl.
Deficiency Report (DR) M02536 dated June 3,
1985 which documented the 40 minute period of over load to 5500 KW which exceeds the 4400 KW nameplate and 4840 KW 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> overload rating NEI Peebles Electric Products, Inc. letter EF-3251 dated June 12, 1985 which states that the 5500 KW overload would not adversely affect the generator since it represents less than one percent electrical overload on the generator.
Cooper Energy Services letter of June 4 and July 8, 1985 pro-viding evaluation of the consequences of the overload upon the diesel engine.
Cooper states that this operation at 5500 KW represents a load of 460 horsepower per cylinder.
The engine is continuous duty rated at 450 horsepower per cylinder.
The ten horsepower overage is considered by Cooper to be within the design conditions for the power cylinders since this is sub-stantially less than the amount normally seen if one cylinder were lost during operation due to an injector or other failure.
Cooper concluded that no major stresses have occurred to warrant any specific re-inspections of the engine and that continuation of normal testing and inspections will serve to adequately identify any deficiencies in the unit.
The overload condition on the EDG was caused by operator error.
The operator responsible for loading the generator used the 5500 KVA (0.8 pf),
100% load rating as a basis for loading.
How-ever, the load being used for a test load was essentially unity power factor resistance heaters in an auxiliary electric boiler.
In loading the generator with an equivalent electrical load, the operator loaded it to 5500 KW without considering that this was an over load condition:
In order to prevent recurrence of this problem, loading curves have been prepared for various power factor loads and these curves have been made a part of the loading instructions for operating the EDG units.
This item is closed.
2.2 Closed Construction Deficienc 85-00-11 regarding high pressure lube oil hose failure in the Cooper emergency diesel generator (EDG)
2 EGS*EGl.
Licensee inspection of EDG 2 EGS*EG3 disclosed a poten-tial for similar fai lure.
The hose is internal to the engine and serves to supply lube oil to the timing chain sprocket.
The apparent cause of failure was a loose improperly supported hose that was abraded by either or both the timing chain and timing chain sprocket.
Cooper Energy Services has redesigned the lube oil hose so as to mount it more rigidly and supplied the replacement hoses clamps and screws to the licensee.
The new hoses have been installed and are considered by Cooper to be a solution to this problem.
This item is close i(
hl
2.3 Closed Construction Deficienc 85-00-23 relating to vendor draw-ing error for the Woodward governor for the Cooper emergency diesel generators.
The Cooper Energy Services drawing No. 5-253-199, Sheet 1, incorrectly showed input current transformer neutral legs for phases b and c transposed.
The actual wiring within the governor panel was correct; however due to the drawing transposition the field cables were connected incorrectly.
The drawing error was detected prior to operating the EDG units with the incorrect field wir,ing terminations.
The effect of the error if undetected would have been to render the electronic load sensing capabilities of the governor inoperative.
Since these current transformers circuits are connected to an electronic adder within the governor, it is possible that the transposed phase neutrals would have led to damage to the governor.
The licensee now has corrected governor and field drawings as docu-mented in EDCR No.
C45542A.
Field wiring has been corrected and the diesels have been operated.
This item is closed.
2.4 Closed Construction Deficienc 85-00-08 'pertaining to missing electrical jumpers in the engine control panels for the Cooper emergency diesel generators.
The jumpers were shown on the Cooper drawings but were not installed.
The jumpers are to redundant relay contacts that provide loss of power start for the EOG units.
The diesels would have still started on LOP but the units would be subject to single fai lure loss.
The missing jumpers have now been installed, the diesels have been operated and the circuits have been proven.
This item is closed.
Closed IE Bulletin 73-1 relating to faulty overcurrent trip delay devices in Westinghouse Model DB-25, DB-50, and OB-75 circuit breakers.
The licensee has confirmed that the Westinghouse Model OB circuit breakers are not used at NMP2.
This items is closed.
2.6 Closed IE Bulletin 71-2 relating to failure of the undervoltage trip devices in Westinghouse model DB-50 circuit breaker s.
The licensee has confirmed that the Westinghouse Model DB 50 circuit breakers are not used at NMP2.
This item is close.7 Closed IE Bulletin 80-15 relating to possible loss of Emergency Notification System ENS with a loss of offsite power.
The power supply for this system formerly came from the offsite power grid.
It has now been changed such that it normally is fed from the onsite power grid with a transfer switch to provide power from offsite or from the Unit 1 emergency diesel unit 102.
This item is closed.
I'.0 Instrumentation Cable and Terminations Review of Work and Work Activities The inspector observed completed work relating to the installation of safety related cables to ascertain whether the requirements of applicable specifications, procedures, and instructions are being met in the areas relating to physical separation, routing, cable tray fill, termination, and inspection procedures.
Documents examined for this determination include the following:
Electrical Installation Specification E 061A, Revision 10, dated October 3, 1985.
Quality Assurance Inspection Plans N020E061AFA025 and N020E061AFA026, October 9,
1985 revision, Electrical Installation Cable Pulling; Cable, Jumper and Internal Terminations and Splices.
Quality Standard QS-10-52-NM, Revision 0 dated October 10, 1984-Raceway and Cable Installation.
Quality Assurance Inspection Report IR E 4079089.
Quality Assurance Inspection Report IR E 5A40117.
Quality Assurance Inspection Report IR E 5A40421.
The inspector selected an instrumentation power cable and two control cables in the Residual Heat Removal System which were run from Motor Control Center 2EHS*MCC103 to control panel 2CES*PNL405.
The power cable was then routed to motor operated valve 2RHSMOV9A.
Terminations and identification within the motor control center and in the control panel were verified.
The routing, support, spacing, separation and identification of the cables were verified outside the panels and in the cable trays.
The inspector determined that the installation and quality control activities associated with these cable installations were in accordance with the licensee's procedures.
No violations were identifie C 4'9
4.0 Instrumentation Cables
& Terminations Review of ualit Records The inspector selected safety-related instrumentation and control cables that have been installed and tested in order to review pertinent work and quality records to ascertain whether these records are in conformance with NRC requirements and licensee commitments and procedures in the areas of receipt and installation inspections, material certifications, and non-conformance dispositions.
4. 1 Documentation Criteria To determine if the licensee's site quality assurance documentation reflect the inspection and control requirements of FSAR Section 17. 1. 10, the inspector reviewed the following documents.
Quality Assurance Inspection Plan N20E061AFA025 Revision OG, Change 2 dated October 9, 1985 Electrical Installation - Cable Pulling Quality Assurance Inspection Plan N20E061AFA026, Revision OD, Change 2 dated October 9, 1985-Electrical Installation Cable, Jumper and Internal Terminations and Splices Quality Standard QS-10-52-NM, Revision 0, dated October 10, 1984 Raceway and Cable Installation The procedures reviewed were current, properly prepared, and approved.
They were in good order and reflect FSAR requirements.
No violations were identified.
4 '
Records Review The inspector reviewed installation and quality control records for safety related instrumentation and control cables in the RHR System as listed below to verify that the receiving, installation and termination requirements of the documents listed in 4. 1 above are met:
Cable No.
Cable Pull Ticket No.
Cable Racewa Nos.
Ins ection Re ort Nos.
2RHSAGC034 523 2FC 503G35 2CC 527GB 2CC 527GK 2TC 527G E4006479 E4006582 E5A40721 2RHSAGC099 555 2CC526GD 2CC527GK E4079089 E4005858 ESA40421
'
Cable No.
Cable Pull Ticket No.
Cable Racewa Nos.
Ins ection Re ort Nos.
2RHSAGC080 550 2CC527GA 2CC527GK
, 2FC503G29 E4006582 E6A40117 2RHSAGC040 2RHAGC038 527 526 2CC046GA1 2CC046GA3 2CC046GA1 2CC046GA3 ESA41370 ESA41370 The quality control records for the above cable installation included verification of attributes in the following areas:
Identification, installation temperature, raceway status, raceway cleanliness field Q-C witness, cable ticket issue, cable type, end protection, physical integrity routing, support,, bend radii, spacing, cable pull tension, testing, and documentation.
The records are properly prepared, appropriately reviewed, signed and dated.
No violations were identified.
5.0 Instrumentation Com onents
S stems Review of ualit Records The inspector selected safety-related electrical instrumentation equipment and components that have been installed and tested in order to review pertinent work and quality records to ascertain whether these records are in conformance with licensee procedures in the areas of receipt and installation inspections, material certifications, storage, handling and identification.
5. 1 Documentation Criteria To determine if the licensees site documentation reflect the inspec-tion and control requirements of FSAR, Section 17. 1
~ 10 the inspector reviewed the following documents:
Quality Standard QS-10-51-NM Revision 0, October 10, 1984 Electrical Equipment Installation.
Quality Assurance Inspection Plan N20E061AF097, Revision OB, dated February 12, 1985-Electrical Installation (PreInstallation Verification).
Electrical Installation Specifications E 061A, Revision 10 dated October 3, 198 Quality Assurance Inspection Plan N 20E061A040, Revision OD dated June 15, 1984 Electrical Equipment Installation.
The procedures reviewed were current, properly prepared and approved.
They were in good order and reflect FSAR requirements.
No violations were identified.
5.2 Records Review The inspector reviewed quality assurance records for safety related equipment listed below to verify that receiving, storage, and installation requirements listed in 5. 1 above are met.
E ui ment No.
A Record No.
Motor Control Center 2EHS*MCC103C Motor Operated Valve 2RHS'MOV15A Remote Shutdown Panel 2CES"PHL405 IRESA40733 IRESA43547 IRE407 7971 The records reviewed were properly prepared, included inspection attributes covering the requirements, and were properly signed and dated by the inspector and by the inspection reviewer.
These records identified nonconformances, their proper documentation, and timely disposition actions.
No violations were identified.
6.0 Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is needed to determine whether it is acceptable or a violations.
Unresolved items are discussed in Paragraph 2.
7.0 Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1.0)
at the conclusion of the inspection on November 1,
1985, at the construc-tion site.
The inspector summarized the findings of the inspection and the licensee acknowledged the inspector's comments.
The inspector also confirmed with the licensee that the documents reviewed by the team did not contain any proprietary information.
The licensee agreed that the inspection report may be placed in the Public Document Room without prior licensee review for proprietary information (10 CFR 2.790).
At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the tea ~
.
~
l