IR 05000454/1986003
| ML20153B926 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron  |
| Issue date: | 02/10/1986 |
| From: | Gautam A, Muffett J, Smeenge R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20153B899 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-454-86-03, 50-454-86-3, 50-455-86-03, 50-455-86-3, NUDOCS 8602180198 | |
| Download: ML20153B926 (7) | |
Text
-
-
..
.
U.S.-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
Reports No. 50-454/86003(DRS);-50-455/86003(DRS)
Docket Nos. 50-454; 50-455 Licenses No. NPF-37; CPPR-131 Licensee:
Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Name:
Byron Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At:
Byron ~ Site, Byron, IL Inspectron Conducted:
January 7-10, 1986, Inspectors:
R. Smeenge
[MW
(ti uhs M b'
A.S.Gautamj [f,[#
t Date
,
oe Approved By:
J. W. Muffett, Chief Z[lo[%
Plant Systems Section Date
'
Inspection Summary Inspection on January 7-10, 1986 (Reports No. 50-454/86003(DRS);
50-455/86003(DRSS)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, announced safety inspection of the licensee's program for instrumentation cables and terminations. Work activities, quality assurance procedures and quality records in regards to instrumentation cables and terminations were reviewed during this inspection.
The inspection involved a total of.62 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspectors.
Results:
No violations or deviations were identified, however, some unresolved and open items require further evaluation by the NRC.
gBO O
'
_ _ >
. _,
--m
-
.
.
)[, S
. DETAILS
_
1.
Persons Contacted
.Comonwealth Edison Company
- R. B. Klingler, Project QC. Supervisor -
-
'*T. L. Lamb, Project Construction Electrical
.
- E. Briette, QA Engineer-.
J. L. Bergner, QA Supervisor L'.'D. Tucker, Instrument Engineer-
- J.-E. Steinometz, Project Construction Field Engineer
_ L. - Bihlman. - QA Engineer -
- J. Binder,, Project Electrical Supervisor H_atfield Electric' Company
.M.:Bellich, Cable Records-L. Gitchel,J Cable Records
- C. J. Murray, Cable Pulling General Foreman Nuclear Regulatory Comission
. J. Malloy,' Resident Inspector
~* Denotes those present at the onsite exit. interview on January 10, 1986.
-2..
. Licensee _Acti_on on Previ_ous_Inspe_ction Findings-
_
-(Closed) 0m, item'(455/85024-01): This item addressed failures.of CONAX Resistance
'rature Detectors during insulation resistance tests. The-RTDs had beei.
entified on manufacturer's test records as rejected. The licensee. subsequently contacted CONAX and verified that all the 'RTDs in
' question ~had been subsequently retested in accorda'nce with the-correct-
'
acceptance criteria. Manufacturer test reports reviewed by the inspector-during this review, indicated retesting of the applicable RTDs.and their acceptance by CONAX Quality Control inspectors.
!
3.
Program Procedures and Instru_ct_fons_
The NRC_ inspectors reviewed the licensee's procedures, and instructions
= relative.to Linstruirent cables and terminations, to determine whether appropriate and adequate procedures had been implemented, and to assure that the following specific activities were controlled and performed
'
'according to NRC requirements and SAR comitments:
Receipt Inspection, Handl*ng and Storage
Handling and Installation
Inspection and: Testing
- -
Cable Identification
Raceway Separation and Protection
l l
!
l i-k
.
-Q Cable Redundancy and Separation Cable and Termination Testing After Installation Design Changes, Deviations and Unusual Problems
- -
The following documents were reviewed:
Sargent and Lundy Standards:
STD-EA-121, " Cable Pulling Specifications," dated February 28, 1966.
STD-EA-122', " Cable Installation in Cable Trays, Floor Trenches, and Trenches in Earth," dated July 28, 1978.
STD-EB-146, " Standard Specification for the Installation of Seismic Category _1 Conduit Systems Containing Class IE Cable," dated
-
December 28, 1979.
Commonwealth Edison Company System Standards.
C-665, " Identification Marking of Wire, Cable and Troughs in Stations and Substations," dated July 9, 1968.
C-666, " Application of Write-on Cable Identification Marker," dated May 1,,1975.
Hatfield Electric Company.
- Procedure 5,." Class I Material and Equipment Receiving and Inspection,"
Revision 14, dated March 26, 1985.
Procedure 10, " Class I Cable Installation," Revision 24, dated
-
October 18, 1985.
Procedure 11, " Class I Cable Termination and Splicing," Revision 21, dated. Janua ry 22, 1985.
Procedure 16, " Cable Storage and Handling," Revision 8, dated April ~10, 1985.
Procedure 22, " Quality Assurance Records System," Revision 10, dated June 19, 1985.
No deficiencies were identified by the inspectors as a result of this review with the exception of the following two minor discrepancies between the Sargent and Lundy (S&L) Standard, STD-EA-121 and the Hatfield Electric Company procedures and field practices:
a.
Paragraph 5.E. of STD-EA-121, requires pulling cable used to be either wire, manila or hemp rope, where as Procedure 10 requires nylon rope.
'
A table in STD-EA-121 provides tensile strengths for wire, nylon and manila ropes indicating nylon to be acceptable.
'
.
.
The licensee agreed that Paragraph 5.E. of STD-EA-121 would be modified to include nylon rope.
b.
Paragraph 4.A. of STD-EA-12.specified five pulling compounds, or an approved equivalent, to be used during cable pulling.
Cable pull records reviewed identified the pulling compound used to be SLIP-X-300, which was not one of the five approved compounds identified in the standard.
The licensee provided the inspectors with a letter from S&L which accepted SLIP-X-300 as an approved equivalent.
The inspectors has no other concerns in this area.
4.
Plant Walkdown to Review Installed Cables a.
The inspectors performed a "walkdown" of nine installed Class 1E instrumentation cables in the field to review the installation for proper implementation of Hatfield cable installation Procedure 10, Revision 24 and associated procedures and standards. Areas reviewed included cable type, size, routing, bending radius, terminations, separation, function, cable installation records, traceability and protection.
The following cables were selected from the licensees list of equipment required to function during a Design Basis Event.
251467, Safety Injection System, RWST level.
2MS029, Safety Injection System, RPS signal for L0 L0 RWST level.
2SI653, Safety Injection System, RWST empty light indication.
2RY322, Safety Injection System, Level Indication RWST.
2RC510, RPS Trip, High Pressure in Pressurizer.
2RC511, RPS Trip, High Pressure in Pressurizer.
2CS090, Containment Spray System, Containment Pressure transmitter.
2MS056, RPS Trip, Containment Spray Actuation.
2MS057, RPS Trip, Containment Spray Actuation.
For example Cable 2SI467 was reviewed in the field for the following requirements:
2SI467:
Type-1 TW PR16, Shielded, 600V, Reel 02166-116; From:
Level Transmitter 2LT-0930 (DP cell), To:
Cabinet 2PA01J; Actual length 690'; Function-RWST Level.
The cbove cable run was inspected for terminations at both ends and routing in selected raceways 2R600 and 2R401.
Type, size, separation and routing were reviewed in the field using cable tabulation sheet
$I0071 and the cable pull Card 25I467, Revision A.
The installation was found satisfactory.
Cable markings in the field were noted at the 05968 footage point to be IPR 16TN Shield, 600V, F-2852-P0207293-02166-B4-01T]94-2, " Samuel Moore." These markings provided traceability to procurement and receiving documents and vendor certifications.
Cable termination was reviewed at Cabinet 2PA01J Terminal Block TBB 16 and 17 (Wiring Drawing 6E-2-4111A, Revision L) and at level transmitter 2LT-0930 terminal points (+) and (-) (Wiring Drawing 6E-2-4109C, Revision D).
No discrepancies were found.
.
Circuit function for indication of the Refueling water Storage Tank level was reviewed on Loop Schematic Diagram 6E2-40315I01, Revision E.
Wiring diagrams were found to match requirements of the above schematic diagram, and a walkdown was performed on the associated circuits in the loop to the level inaicators in the Main Control Board MCB2PM06J.
During review of the referenced instrumentation cables the inspectors observed separation conflicts in other cables in the auxiliary building equipment rooms.
In addition to one ' separation conflict previously identified by the licensee, the NRC inspectors found fonr other examples of failure to maintain the minimum separation criteria' called for by Hatfield Procedure 11 for flex conduits.
The licensee took corrective action by rerouting the conduits in two of the above four instances of separation conflict.
Cable Separation Conflict Reports (CSCR) 130, 131, 132, and 133 were prepared by the licensee for the remaining two instances of separation conflict identified by the inspectors, involving cables in the auxiliary building relay room.
The licensee has scheduled additional Unit 2 walkdown inspections for conduit separation, safety-related-cable trays and safety-related cable hardware.
These inspections are currently scheduled to be completed April 30, 1986.
Pending NRC review of completion of these licensee's inspections and appropriate corrective action,_ cable separation conflicts are considered an unresolved item (455/86003-01(DRS)).
b.
Cable Storage: The inspectors reviewed the cable storage area in the Turbine Building for implementation of requirements in Hatfield Procedure 16, Revision 8, " Cable Storage and liandling."
The inspectors selected Class IE Cable Reel 01146-241-A for review of storage, traceability and current footage.
Reel logs and Daily Production Reports were reviewed and found updated for the above cable reel.
The last footage reference for the reel in the records reviewed was noted to be 545372.
This footage marker was verified on the reel in the storage area along with storage requirements including insulation of the cable end, environment control, protection from other reels and reel markings.
No violations or deviations'were identified.
5.
Quality Records Review Cable markings recorded during the NRC inspection of installed cables were reviewed against installation procurement and receiving records as well as vendor certifications.
Records were reviewed for Cables 2C5090, 2MS056 and 2SI467 for traceability to the manufacture, and material certifications of conformance to the procurement specifications.
Installation records for the nine cable inspected verified that the size and type of cables, terminations and wireways had been installed as
.
O procedures were followed, including pulling (tension)pplicable cable pull specified. Records of cable pulling confirmed that a limits and that there was documented evidence of inspection of the completed work.
Calibration records for five of the crimp tools identified on the cable pull records were reviewed and found to be traceable back to the National Bureau of Standards, and that tnese crimp tools were in current calibration at the time of their use. The calibration tools reviewed in the field were found to have appropriate calibration stickers, Qualification records of four GC inspectors identified on the cable pull
records were also reviewed. These records verified that the technicians Fad been trained and certified to perform inspections of 'nstrument cable installation activities.
The Hatfield Electric Company Cable Separation Conflict Reports (CSCR)
and records were examined. The CSCR log indicated that numerous Unit 1 and 2, CSCRs had not been closed out even though a computerized record shcwed that these CSCRs had been dispositioned. On being infonred of this discrepancy the licensee took corrective action, and updated the CSCR log to indicate that all Unit 1 CSCRs had been completed. Based on the review of this computerized report (dated January 6, 1986), the NRC inspector identified 224 CSCRs for Unit 2 to be still open.
The licensee provided the inspector rith a Sargent and Lundy (S&L) project status report of December 4,1985, which indicated that of 190 CSCRs received by S&L, 189 had in fact been dispositioned and only one CSCR remained open, (CSCRs initiated by Hatfield are submitted to CECO who in turn forward -
them to S&L for disposition. Once dispositioned, the CSCRs are returned to Hatfield through CECO). The licensee indicatad that one reason for such a large number of CSCRs being open was that enumbered CSCRs are issued to the users in a block of numbers. The computerized report identified both the assigned and unused of the issued block of CSCR numbers as being open. The computerized report was subsequently modified during this review to identify only the 56 CSCRs which have been assigned as open. The inspector was concerned about the number of CSCR's still open and the inconsistency between S&L and Hatfield records.
Pending further review of the status of Unit 2 CSCRs, this is considered an open item. NRC (455/86003-02(DRS)).
6.
Open Items Open items are matters which have been discussed with licensee, which will-be reviewed further by the inspectors, and which inwives some action on the part of the NRC or licensee or both. An open item disclosed during this inspection is discussed in Paragraph 5 of this report.
7.
Unresolved Items An unresolved item is a matter about which more information is required in order.to ascertain whether it is an acceptable item, an open item, a deviation, or a violation. Unresolved item disclosed during this inspection are discussed in Paragraph 4.a. of this report.
.
-
_.
. - -.- -.
.
j :('
.
8.
Exit Interview LThe Region III' inspector ~ met with'the licensee representatives (denoted under Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on January 10, 1986. The inspectors summarized the purpose and findings of the-inspection.
The licensee acknowledged this information.
The inspectors also-discussed the likely informational content of the inspection report with regard to documents o.r processes reviewed.by'the inspectors during-the inspection. The licensee did not identify any such documents / processes as proprietary.
.
m,
e -
m,-
-
,,<,,.e
-
,-y, 4mna
-
-
-- ---
en,
-+m,-
,
-p..,,-ywec,
, -
y m-
, -,
-
=