IR 05000413/1982001
| ML20052G193 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 03/16/1982 |
| From: | Conlon T, Ruff A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20052G178 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-413-82-01, 50-413-82-1, 50-414-82-01, 50-414-82-1, NUDOCS 8205140392 | |
| Download: ML20052G193 (5) | |
Text
,
.
,.
..
/
'o,,
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
<,
$
E REGION ll P
101 MARIETTA ST.. N.W., SUITE 3100 Y
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 4 *****p Report Nos. 50-413/82-01 and 50-414/82-01 Licensee:
Duke Power Company P. O. Box 2178 Charlotte, NC 28242 Facility Name:
Catawba Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414 License Nos. CPPR-116 and CPPR-117 Inspection at Catawba Nt. clear site near Roct Hill, South Carolina Inspector:
Wh$vf?
3bf/hh
/
A. Y. Ru f f[/
' Date Signed
_///>
M 3//k/ $4 Approved b
.
. E. Conion, Se Chie'__ '
Engineering Inspection Branchy
~
' Date Signed
-
Division of Engineering and Technical Programs SUMMARY Inspection on February 23-26, 1982 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 26 inspector-hours on site in the areas of electrical work and work activities, electrical quality records and storage records for electrical equipment in general storage areas.
Results Of the three areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified in two areas; one item of noncompliance was found in one area (Documentation Required for General Storage Inspections by Area, Paragraph 5).
8205140392 820416 PDR ADOCK 05000413 G
)
- .
.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees S. Dressler, Senior Construction Engineer
- T. H. Robertson, Construction Engineer Civil Welding (Acting Site Manager)
- R. A. Morgan, Quality Assurance Senior Engineer
- J. W. Rowell, Construction Engineer Electrical
- W. T. McClure, Quality Assurance Representative J. W. Glenn, Associate Quality Assurance Engineer C. Mumford, Transmission Division Relay Section NRC Resident Inspector
- P. K. Van Doorn
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview
.
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on February 26, 1982, with those persuns indicated in paragraph 1 above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Violation 50-413/81-21-01, Cable Route Contrary to the Cable Routing Card.
Duke Power Company letter of response dated December 9, 1981 has been reviewed and determined to be acceptable by Region II. The inspector held discussions with licensee representative and examined the corrective actions as stated in the letter of response.
The inspector concluded that the licensee had determined the full extent of the subject noncompliance, performed the necessary survey and follow-up actions to correct the present conditions and developed the necessary corrective actions to preclude recurrence of similar circumstances.
The corrective actions identified in the letter of response have been implemented.
These corrective actions consisted of:
a.
The training of craft personnel on how to properly complete termina-tions in accordance with the design installation specification, b.
The revision of Duke inspection requirement M41B, Serial No.15, to include the verification of the last junction point during the termi-nation inspection.
,
_
..s..
.
~
,
2'
c.
Reinspection of all rafety cables where the termination inspection has been performed prior to the revision of. Duke inspection. requirement M41B, Serial No.15.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
- 5.
Independent Inspection The inspector conducted an inspection of the - auxiliary and containment buildings to observe the current status of the e1,ectrical construction program and ~an inspection was made of the yard areas adjacent to these buildings to observe the general storage of electrical items. During this
'. _
inspection it was noted that several reels of electrical cable, in the yard area, were not protected with _ weatherproof coverage. The licens'ee stated that these reels supplied the cables for current on going cable installation and that periodic general storage inspections were made in this area and that jacketed cables were _ not required to be covered.
The inspector requested the periodic general-storage-inspection records-for this. area and was informed that only discrepant items found during these inspections were documented. Refer to Duke Power Company Procedure P-3 Rev 13, Storage Inspection, paragraph 4.1.2.
The 'above is deficient. in that inspections are to be documented along with discrepant findings.
This is in violation of 10 CFR 50 Appendix B Criteria XVII which states ' that records shall be maintained to furnish evidence of activities affecting quality and inspection records shall as a minimum identify the inspector, the type of observation, the results, etc.
This violation will be identified as 50-413, 414/82-01-01, " Failure to Document General-Storage Inspections by Area."
6.
Electrical (Components and Systems I) - Observation of Work and Work Acti-vities (Unit 1)
The inspector selected Diesel Generator 1A, Diesel Generator Control Panel A, and Diesel Generator starting Air Compressor Motor 1A-1 for an examination.
This equipment was examined to assure that SAR, QAM.and installation procedures were complied with in the areas of receiving inspection, storage, identification, handling, placements, protection, cleanliness, separation location, anchoring, and qualification of QC personnel.
Within the area examined there were no violations identified.
7.
Electrical (Components and System I) - Review of Quality Records (Unit 1)
The inspector selected the equipment identified in paragraph 6 for a quality record review to assure that Duke Power Company QAM procedures were being followed in the areas of receipt inspection, certification system, and y
d
...,.
.
protection.
In addition the installation records confirm that specified-components were installed, and required inspections were performed.
8.
Electrical. (Components and Systems II)
. Observation of Work and. Work Activities (Unit 1).
The inspector selected.the following electrical components for an examina-tion..This examination was to assure that SAR and QAM requirements were complied.within the areas of installation procedure implementation and inspection, protection and cleanliness, location, identification and storage.
The trip settings for: several breakers in electrical l oad.
centers 1ELXA and IELXD were also examined.
a.
1ELXB 600 ' volt load center b.
1ELXD 600 volt load center c.
-1ETXB
'4.16kv/600 volt Xfrmr d.
1ETXD 4.16kv/600 volt Xfrmr.
e.
IETXF 4.16kv/600 volt Xfrmr f.
1ECA 120 volt D.C.. Battery Charger g.
1EIA 120 volt DC/AC Inverter h.
1ERPA 120 volt Vital AC Dist.
i.
INS 043 Motor Operator Valve J.
INS 029A Motor Operator Valve k.
1NI185A Motor Operated Valve 1.
1NI332A Motor Operated Valve Within _the areas examined, there were no violations identified.
9.
Electrical (Components and System II) - Review of Quality Records (Unit 1)
The inspector selected Motor Operated Valves, INSO43A, 1NI185A, INS 029A, and 1NI332A for a quality record ~ review. This review was to assure that SAR and QAM were complied with in the areas installation inspection, identification and storage, protection and inspection records. Also the
- .
records for breaker trip settings for breakers in cubicles IELXA and IELXD were reviewed.
Within the areas examined, there were ne violations identified.
10.
Licensee Identified Items (LII)
a.
(Closed) Item 413, 414/81-07-07 " Moving Arc Contacts on 600 Volt LC.
Breakers Manfactured by Gould Were Found Cracked (10 CFR 50.55(e).
!
A licensee report was submitted on March 9, 1981. The report has been L
reviewed and determined to be acceptable. The inspector held discus-sions with responsible licensee representatives, reviewed supporting
'
!
documentation, and observed representative samples of work to verify
,
i
!'
i d
~
.
.....
.
that the. corrective actions identified in the report have been initi-ated. Work is in process to' replace defective contact and -the open items' are being tracked on Duke Power Company NCI Reports 12250 and 10684.
b.
.(Closed)' Item CDR 413, 41'4/81-17 " Contact Between Magnetic Latch Lever and Current Sensor Coil on LC Breakers Manufactured by Gould" (10 CFR 50.55(e). A licensee report.was submitted on August 13, 1981. The report has been reviewed and determined to be acceptable. The inspec-tor held discussions with responsible licensee representatives, reviewed supporting documentation, and observed representative ' samples of work to verify that the corrective actions identified.in the report have been initiated. Work is in process to correct the clearance between these two parts and the open items are being tracked on Duke-Power Company NCI Report-12250.
c.
(Closed) Item CDR 413, 414/81-21 and 81;22 " Cracks Found in Jacketing Material of MV Power, Cables - '8KV' and 15KV" (10 CFR 50.55(e)). A licensee report was submitted on October-23,1981. The report _has been reviewed and determined to be acceptable. The inspector held discus-sions with responsible licensee representatives,- reviewed supporting documentation to verify that the corrective actions identified -in the report'have been. completed. Duke Power Company's NCI Report 12481 and 12915 ~was used to identify this cable and showed that it was used in -
non-class IE application; or returned to the vendor.
d.
(Closed) Item CDR. 413.414/81-24 "High Range In-Containment' Radiation Monitor Cable, Rockbestos Cable RSS-6-104 Not Qualified"..(10 CFR 50.55(e)). A licensee report _was submitted on November 5,1981. The report has _ been reviewed and determ.ined. to be acceptable.
The inspector held discussions with respon'sible licensee representatives, reviewed supporting documentation.
NCI Report 13013 showed that'
subject cable was not installed and was in the warehouse for return to the vendor. Cable was observed to be in the warehouse with proper non-conforming material tag attached.
e.
(Closed) Item CDR 413/81-27 " Water in Electrical Area Terminal Cabinet - 1EATC-3" (10 CFR 50.55(e)). A licensee report was submitted on December 4, 1981. The report has been reviewed and determined to be acceptable. The inspector held discussions with responsible licen-see representatives, reviewed supporting documentation, and observed representative samples of work to. verify. that the corrective actions identified in the report have been completed. The subject cabinet was examined and-found to be clean. NCI Report 13323 showed that affected-relays were replaced.
,
(
' -