ML19276H301
| ML19276H301 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 04/29/1971 |
| From: | Haywards W, Howard E, Hunnicutt D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19276H275 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-71-02, 50-289-71-2, NUDOCS 7910160645 | |
| Download: ML19276H301 (14) | |
Text
.
l?,.y
,- s
't.)
v U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY CCO!ISSION 9
REGICN I DIVISION OF CQ4PLIANCE Report of Inspection CO Report No. 289/71-2 Licensee:
Metropolitan Edison Company (Met. Ed.)
Three Mile Island Unit No. 1 License No. CPPR-40 Category A Date of Inspection:
April 5 - 8, 1971 Date of Previous Inspection:
January 18 and 19, 1971 Inspected by:11#)h
)
29-7/
D. M. Hunnicutt, Reac %r Inspector (Principal)
Date 9
.s jm SL/
g-29 7/
E. % Howard, Senior Reactor Inspector Date
- h. //
lb h 7-9-7/
J. H. Tillou, Reactor Inspector '(Constructicn)
Date
%. S. h x\\n u k 2.9 be'd 7 i W. M. Hayward, ReaNtor Inspector (Construction)
Datt ff).
h d-29-7)
Revicued by:
J jyd e M M. Howard, Senior Reactor Inspector Date Proprietary Information:
None 1419 158 SCOP 1 A routine, unannounced inspection was made of Unit No. 1, cne of the twc 2535 Mwt pressurized water reactors (B&W) under construction on Three Mile Island, near Middletown, Pennsylvania.
The aspection effort was directed toward an appraisal of the performance of the licensee-contractor effort of various items listed in 6
u.sundary Piping, Attachment G - Other Class I Piping, Attachment H - Instrumenta-3800/2 and included an inspection of Attachment F - Reactor Coolant Pressure tion, Attachment I - Electrical, and a review of outstanding items from previous inspections.
7910160 y
..n.
j.?>,..$
/
l
's. )
O
?
6 *
SUMMARY
Safety Items - None Nonconformance Items
'l.
Gilbert Associates, Inc., drawing S-211-002 states in part, "The computer will select the path between the beginning and end trays and will print the route on the computer circuit routing summary and the pull slips. The intermediate locations (path between the beginning and end trays) is not in all cases provided on the computer routing summary and the pull slips."
2.
Two redundant 480 volt power centers were found to be approximately five feet apart with no separating barrier as required by the FSAR.
A CDN was itsued on April 20, 1971 to cover these two deficiencies.
Other Significant Items 1.
Core Flooding Tanks let-Ed has rejected both of the Core Flooding Tanks originally fabricated 9
for irstallation in Unit No. 1.
Both of these tanks failed to meet the NDTI requirement for unrestricted service at fi 40 F and 600 F as required in Volume 3, Section 6 of the FSAR. The two core flooding tanks scheduled for Unit No. 2 appear to meet these requirements and are scheduled to be installed in Unit No. 1 in late 1971.
(See Section H.)
2.
Insulation Studs on Primary System comoonents No procedures have been prepared nor have any quality control processes or surveillance plans been developed for use during installation of the studs' to be used to secure insulation onto the exterior surfaces of the stecm generators and the pressurizer.
(See Section I.1) 3.
Quality control procedures relative to confirmation that the specified c'ble has been issued and installed have not been developed.
(See section M.)
4.
The stated commitments in the FSAR relative to physical separatien of wireways and conduits does not appear to be adequately controlled.
(See Section M.)
5.
Procedures require that each equipment ground bond be checked between the ground grid and the equipment or structure to which the terminal lug is attached, and that all field assemblies, bolted connections and welded connections oe checked and/or tested for physical and/or electrical contin-9 uity.
Procedures to provice qualitative evidence have not been prepared.
(See Section M.)
1419 159
7,,,y T
(
U
- 6.
Procedures for color coding of cable and cable trays, which are an FSAR co=mitment, have not yet been developed.
(See Section M.)
7.
Procedures have not been prepared describing the minimum frequency at which cable trays are to be numbered or the frequency of recurrence of color coding.
(See Section M.)
8.
The UE6C draf t checklist does not provide for verification that the design objective physical fill of the cable trays has not been exceeded.
(See Section M.)
Status of previousiv Reported Problems 1.
" Certificate of Conformance" for individual items in lieu of certifications, which will be issued upon completion of the contract by Grinnell Company has not been resolved.
(See Section C.)
2.
Inspection and evaluations of the damage to'three reactor v3ssel nozzles which were marred during transit has not been completed. Thl.s item is not considered resolved.
(See Section D.)
G One core sample has been compression tested and one core sample has been tensile pulled in an effort to determine the concrete strength and bonding along the joint between cured concrete and concrete poured, when the measured surface temperature of the surfaces to be in contact with newly placed con-crete was below 320 F.
Apparently, Met-Ed has no plans to take additional samples for ev~aluation and/or comparison or to perform additional tests en these samples.
(See Section F.)
4.
Met-Ed will use grease (N0-0X-ID manufactured by the W. R. Grace Company) instead of grout for the tendon sheathing fill. This item is considered resolved.
(See Section G.)
Management Interview The management interview was held in the corporate offices in Reading, Pennsyl-vania with Messrs. J. C. Miller, George Bier nan, Earl Allen, M. J. Stromberg, H. I. Stewart and J. L. C. Bachoffer, Jr. on April 8,1971.
Mr. Miller stated that there was an apparent misunderstanding on his part as to the organizational structure in the Division of Compliance and requested that the organization be explained.
The inspectors gave a blackboard presentation to the group.
The inspectors stated that the Division of Compliance did make unannounced inspections of licensed facilities, since QC procedures, work performance 9
product rather than to be prepared solely for AEC review.
Tchniques and documentation should be implemented in order to obtain a quality Mr. Miller was told that the AEC had revised their inspection plans several times in order to accomodate General Public Utilities, the parent organization cf Metropolitan 1419 160
-l-Q u O i
Edison, in the QA re-inspecdon of Forked River, and further the planned inspection dates are changed due to a need for personnel for a specific and unplanned inspec-tion.
The inspector stated that the Construction Deficiency Notice was not intended to
" point a finger", but rather to provide the licensee with an opportunity to re-spond in writing concerning the corrective action or justify their position.
It was further pointed out that a nonconformance item, unless corrected, would be written as a CDM without any distinction as to.who discovered the nonconformance.
Mr. Miller stated that Metropoliton Edison intended to meet their commitments.
The inspector responded that the inspection effort on the part of compliance coincides with this expressed intent.
Mr. Miller was told that he should feel free to_ contact anyone in the Divisicn of Compliance, if an area of concern should arise, which he feels has not been satisfactorily resolved by the Compliance inspectors. He was also informed that the assigned inspector and the senior would be available for discussions.
he items which were found deficient during the inspection were discussed.
Mr.
9
- tiller was informed that the concrete problem in the fuel handling building wo be forwarded to Compliance Headquarters for additional review and action, if considered necessary.
Mr. Miller asked if DRL was aware of the problem. Tha inspector stated that Mr. Ross had contacced him concerning the problem after reading our previous report.
Mr. Miller wanted to know what action he coula take to get early resolution. The inspectors stated that if DRL was not satisfied with the extent of Met Ed's testing as reported by CO, resolutien wculd come from DRL.
Mr. Miller asked if he could contact DRL.
The inspectors stated that Met Ed should take whatever action they considered necessary and in their, interest.
The failure of the computer program to provide complete routing information was discussed by the inspector.
Mr. Miller asked Mr. Allen if this was a problem at the site.
Mr. Allen replied that it was.
Mr. Bierman stated that this item would be included in a forthcoming meeting with GAI.
The failure of the licensee to maintain separation of redundant power systems was discussed by the inspector.
Mr. Miller stated that appropriate action would be forthcoming to assure fulfillment of Met Ed's commitments concerning this and similar type problems.
The inspector stated that there appeared to be little or no guidance given to CONAM inspectors concerning visual inspections prior to sign-off of " Weld History Records". Messrs. Allen and Stromberg stated that this matter would be evaluated ul appropriate action taken, j/]g jf]
4 The inspector stated that there was no procedure or process control for installa-tion of studs on the steam generators and pressurizer.
Mr. Miller stated that any welding performed on these vessels would be in compliance with B&W procedures and the applicable codes.
l."g-
.J t.
,5 -
G The inspector stated that no detailed assignment or responsibility for preparation of procedures for piping system hydrostatic testings was available for review.
Mr. Allen stated that the operations group of Met Ed had been assigned the respon-sibility for preparation of procedures and that this group would witness the hydrostatics tests.
The inspector stated that rusty welds and rust along the heat affected zcne on pipe spool No. SF-32 had been observed.
Also, there was no indication in the y d.4+eh+e-1 Release Report or the site receiving report that this violation of UE&C procedure QC-ll, Grinnel Specification No. FS-350-5 (Supplement SS-980-E) or GAI Specification No. SP-5550 had been identified. A "QC Release for Construc-tion" tag was attached to this pipe spool to indicate its acceptance for con-struction use.
Mr. Allen stated that the problem had been identified and tlat Met Ed had a copy of a letter from Mr. L. D. Schmer, Metallurgist, GAI, to UE&C, dated 7/28/69, which stated that the rust stain observed on the piping near welds is the result of free iron surface contamination and will cause no corrosion er other problems in drain pipe service.
He said that this letter also stated that magnet tests showed weld metal to be 9 - 10*/. ferrite, acceptable for ER 308 grade weld metal.
9 The licensee had no further comments concerning the results of the inspection nd the meeting was concluded.
DETAILS A.
Persons Contacted Met Ed
- Mr. J. C. Miller, Vice President, Engineering
- Mr. H. I. Stewart, Assistant Construction Manager
- Mr. George Bierman, Project Manager
- Mr. John L. C. Bachoffer, Jr., Assistant Project Manager for Engineering and Construction
- Mr. Earl Allen, Resident QA Supervisor
- Mr. Matt J. Stromberg, Resident QA Supervisor (Replacement for Mr. Allen)
Mr. Vern Stuebner, Resident Engineer, Electrical Mr. W. Shepard, Resident Engineer, Mechanical Mr. Gene Hreczuch, Construction Engineer Mr. L. Lunstrom, Site QA Monito - for Welding and Piping
- Attended the Management Interview in Reading, Pa., only.
- Attended the Management Interview in Reading, Pa., and contacted at the construction site during the inspection.
1419 162
j.'y. !;
)
. O C0tIAM Mr. John Luksic, Site Supervisor for CONAM Inspection Laboratory, Inc.
Mr. Don Hilfiger, CONAM Site Inspector on the Spent Fuel Storage System UE&C Mr. J. E. Fant, Senior Site QC Engineer and Supervisor Mr. Guy Kopp, QC Engineer (Electrical)
Mr. J. Walsh, Site Welding Engineering Mr. Harold Finlan, Site QC Engineer, Welding and NI7r Mr. J. Ellson, Site Piping Engineer Mr, Robert Schmeidel, Forcran Stainless Steel Welding Mr. George Schmidt, Field Supervisor for Installation of Hangers, Supports and Restraints B.
Construction Status Mr. Shepard estimated that Unit No. I was approximately 657. complete, based on man hours expended.
Initial reactor fueling is estimated for late 1972, according to Mr. Shepard.
J.
Grinnell Documentation
- Mr. Hreczuch stated that Grinnen Company will submit " Certificates of Con-formance" with individual items which require documentary evidence of conformance with a code throughout the life of the contact.
Grinnen Company will submit the certifications whenever the contract on a spe<:ific system has been completad.
The inspector re-emphasized the provisions stated in Appendix B, 10 CFR 50, concerning adequate documentation prior to installing components.
D.
Reactor Vessel **
Mr. Hreczuch stated that Met Ed and B&W have completed the inspection and evaluation and are preparing procedures for the repair of the three nozzles that were slightly marred during transit. The repairs will be done concurrently with installation of the primary system piping, according to Mr. Hreczuch.
The inspector does not consider this item resolved.
The item will be carried as an outstanding item until adequate repairs have been completed.
E.
Primary Coolant System Pipinz (PCSP) 1.
Rust Observed Inside One 28 Inch Pipe Assembly Site records indicate that an NSSS system deviation report was issued on December 23, 1970 for one piece of 28 inch diameter inlet piping for 9
- CO Report No. 2d9/71-1, paragraph C.
- C0 Report No. 289/71-1, paragraph D.
! 4 } 9
} []3
t s j the primary coolant system.
This pipe assembly (A-67-205-50-1) was marked "A-67" and fabricated to B&W Drawing 131945E-9 was received at the construction site with both ends uncovered.
A film of rust was observed inside the pipe. The interior surface of the pipe was ground and wire brushed at the construction site.
The entire clad surface was penetrant tested and the weld preparation surface was magnetic par-ticle tested subsequent to completion of manual removal of the rust film.
No indications of deleterious conditions were observed, when a visual inspection for Class C cleanliness and a six hour wet cloth test were performed.
The dessicant was replaced inside the pipe and the end caps secured.
2.
Mockup for Procedure and Welder Oualification Mr. Allen stated that the Primary Coolant System weld procedures and welder qualifications will be performed, using full sized mockups in the positions expected during actual in,stallation.
3.
Cladding of PCSP After Field Weldine Has Been Comoleted Mr. Allen stated that all PCSP field welds will be clad with stainless steel oveclay subsequent to completion of the field welding. The 9
cladding will be prforLed according to B&W Weld Data Sheet WJ-7 and B&W Specification W-50.
4.
Receiving, Unloading and Installation of the PCSP B&W Specification No. FS-III-3 (8/1/70) provides the guidelines for receiving, unloading and installation of the PCSP and the Primary Coolant System Pump Casings.
Prior to start of installation of the PCSP and pump casings, the erec-tion contractor is requested to submit to the B&W representative, for review, detailed procedures which are to outline the method and sequence of installation and specifications that are to be used for preheat, welding, post-weld heat treatment and NUI.
Backing rings will be removed after completion of the field welding and magnetic particle testing conducted, in addition, radiography of the weld joints will be performed.
Lif ting lugs will be torch cut approximately 1/2 inch from the PCSP or pump casings, then ground flush with the surface. The areas ground will be examined by either liquid penetrant or magnetic particle tested.
O im m
)
-E-F.
Concrete Pour When the Measured Surface Temnerature in Contact With the Concrete Was Less Than 320 F.*
Site records and discussions with various Met Ed and UE&C personnel revealed the following:
On January 8, 1971, approximately 230 cubic yards of concrete was placed in a fuel handling building wall at elevation 331 to 346 feet' running north and south from 17 feet west of the reactor centerline.
At the time of this placement, the measured surface temperature of the surfaces to be in centact with the concrete was below 32o F at the beginning of the scheduled pour.
The concrete placement under the conditions stated above is contrary to Volume II, Section 5 of the FSAR which invokes ACI 318-63 and 301-66. A CDN was issued by CO:I and answered by the lic ensee as the intended corrective a9 tion, which was considered adequate.
Subsequent to the issuance of the CDN and the licensee's reply, the four core samples were removed from the fuel handling building wall along the joint between the concrete below 320 F and the 230 cubic yard scheduled pour for These samples were designated TCla, TC2a, TC3a and TC4a. The 9
evaluation.
.imensions of samples No. TCla and TC4a which were damag:.d during renoval are not recorded in the PIL Test Report, PG-2642, dated March 19, 1971, nor other available documentation et Three Mile Island.
Sample No. TC2a was 3.75 inches in diameter and the capped length was 7-1/2 inches. The sample was tested for compressive strength per ASTM C-42 and failed at 4050 psi. The direction of loading was parallel to the construction joint.
The age of the sample was nine weeks.
(Unit No. 1 FSAR, Volume II, states that Class I concrete will have a minimum strength of 5000 psi at 28 days.)
Sample No. TC3a was 3.75 inches in diameter and the length was reported to' be 8.12 inches. The splitting tensile strength (per ASTM C-496) of the sample was 395 psi.
A double split occurred during the test simultaneously, one in the construction joint and another approximately 1/2 inch from, but parallel to the construction joint in the adjacent concrete. The age of the sampla was nine weeks.
All four of the, core samples were examined under 10 power mas;nification at the bonded and fractured surfaces to determine any signs of freezing. There were no frost prints or other indications of freezing which would adversely affect the concrete bond.
1419 165 PIL Test Report No. FH-87, dated February 10, 1971, states that the test cylinders were seven day moist cured and the balance of the curing period was 9
in air. failed at greater than 5000 psi during the compressive strength tests on the 28 All ten of the test cylinders taken during the 230 cubic yard pour day old cylinders.
- C0 Report No. 289/71-1,. paragraph E and Inquiry Memorandum No. 289/71-A, dated April 13, 1971.
f_g ';
O
- The licensee stated that the wall was accepted on the basis of PIL's " Test and Evaluation Program", Order No. PG-2642, dated March 19, 1971, and a research paper by TYNES entitled " Investigation of Methods of Preparing Horizontal Con-struction Joints in Concrete", Technical Report No. 6-518, U. S. Army Engineers, Walenway's Experimental Station, published in July, 1959.
One sample was compression tested and one sample was tensile pulled. There appears to be no basis on which to accept or refute a one sample evaluation.
No sample cores were removed from the central portion.of the five foot thick wall for evaluation, and cores were not taken from previously accepted concrats pours for comparison and/or evaluation.
Apparently, Met Ed has no plans to take additional samples for evaluation and/or comparison or perform additional tests, such as density measurements on these samples.
G.
Containment Vessel Tendons and Sheathing
- Mr. Hreczuch stated that Gilbert Associates, Inc., (GAI) has completed an evaluation that compared the use of grease (N0-0X-ID, manufactured by the W. R.
Grace Company) with grouting.
Met Ed will fill the tendon sheathings with grease.
The inspector considered this outstanding item to be resolved.
9 Core Flooding Tanks (Accumulators)
Met Ed has rejected both of the B&W fabricated Core Flooding Tanks scheduled for installation in Unit No.1 for failure to meet the NDTT requirement for unrestricted service at f.400 F and 600 F.
These two tanks were fabricated from materit.1 meeting SA 515 requirements, which is not intended for lcw temperature service.
Two core flooding tanks originally scheduled for delivery for Unit No. 2 are to be fabricated from SA 516 material and will be installed in Unit No. 1 in late 1971. According to Mr. Shepard, these two tanks meet the requiraments stated in Volume 3, Section 6 and Table 6-1 of the FSAR.
The inspector will followup on this outstanding item during future construc-tion site inspections.
f !f f }
I.
Procedures 1.
Site OA Procram The Met Ed site QA program contains no detailed assignment of the responsibility for preparation of procedures nor for conducting hydro-static tests of piping systems.
O
- C0 Report No. 289/71-1, paragraph II. 2.a.
.- (. y
~,
~, 2.
Insulaulon Studs on Primary System Comoonents No procedure has been prepared nor any quality control process or surveillance forms developed for use during installation (by welding) of the one half inch diameter by one inch long studs to be used to secure the thermal insulation on the exterior surfaces of the steam generators and the pressurizer. This change in insulation installation requirements is covered in Supplement No. 4, Gilbert Associates, Inc.,
Specification No. SP-5669.
The steam generators and pressurizer are stenciled with the following warning:
"Do not burn, chip, grind, or allow any form of arc strikes on this vessel".
J.
High Head Safety Injection and Residual Heat Remeval Systems The inspection effort consisted of a detailed review of the QC system as required by Attachment G, "Other Class I Piping", PI 3800/2, items 4805.03 through 4805.04.b.3, 4805.04.c.1 through 4805.d.3, 4805.04.f.2 through 4805.04.g.5 and 5005.03 for the High Head Safety Injection and Residual Heat Removal Systems. All items inspected were found to be in accordance with approved specifications and procedures and FSAR commitments.
O Containment K
Sprav, Reactor Coolant, Safety Injection, Chemical and Volume Control. Residual Heat Rcmoval and Reactor Coolant Vent and Drain Component Coolines Systems The inspection effort cons:!sted of a detailed review of the QC system as required by Attachment L, "Other Class I Components",'PI 3800/2, items 4905.03 through 4905.04.b.8 for each of the above systems.
All items inspected were found to be in accordance with approved specifications and procedures and FSAR commitments L.
Fuel Handling System The inspectiot effort consisted of a detailed review of the QC system as required by Attachment F, " Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping",
PI 3800/9, items 4805.04.e.1 through e.6, 4805.05.a.'. through a.5, 4805.06.a.1 through a.5, 5005.04.f.3, f.5 and f.7, 5005.05.a.1, a.2 and a.3 and 5005.06.a.2 and a.3.
All items inspected were found to be in accordance with approved specifications and procedures and FSAR co=mitments, except as follows:
l.
The CONAM inspectors are not given guidance nor are the " visual" characteristics to be inspected identified for CO Et inspectors prior to their sign off on the " Weld History Record".
2.
The Metropolitan Edison site QA program does not contain a detailed assignment of the responsibility for preparation of procedates nor for actually conducting piping system hydrostatic tests.
3.
Mottled areas of rust were observed over the weld and the heat affected zone on pipe spool No. SF-32 where the pipe was joined to a 45 elbew and to a 90 elbow. This condition had not been identificd by either
.__o...--
g'
., _ )
~
11 -
9 the Bechtel fendor surveillance inspector on his Release Report, nor by the site receiving inspector.
A "QC Release for Construction" tag is attached to this pipe spool.
Surface rust on a stainless steel pipe spool in the Spent Fuel Storage System is in violation of UE&C Specification QC-ll, " Cleanliness Control"; Grinnell Specification FS-350-5; Supplement SS-980-E,
" Cleaning of Stainless Steel Pipe"; and Gilbert Associates, Inc.
(GAI) Specification, No. SP-5550, Section 5.4.4, " Cleaning, Etc.
for Stainless Steel Piping".
M.
Cables and Terminations The inspection effort consisted of a detailed review of the QC System as required by Attachment H, " Instrumentation" and by Attachment I, " Electrical",
PI 3800/2, items 5205.04.b.2, c.3, f.5, f.6 and f.9 and Receipt and Storage Procedures for Electrical components including, the following:
1.
Definition of responsibility for receipt inspection and storage com-ponents at the construction site.
-S 2.
Adequacy of information to guide the receipt inspection and handling operations.
3.
Adequacy and appropriateness of storage space for components special hat;dling.
4.
Adequacy of provisions and instructions for periodic inspections of stored components and documentation of the inspection.
No deficiencies or items of nonconformance were found in the above areas, however, the resistance value specified for motor windings rates over 600 vel'ts of R = KV + 1 megohm appears very low and will be compared on a later inspection d u the manufacturer's recommeaded value.
The quality control proccoures for cables were inspected which included the following items:
1.
Procurement 2.
Materials Certification 3.
Nondestructive Tests 4.
Marking and Identification j419 168 O
5.
Protection frcnt Contamination 6.
Packaging 7.
Quarantine and Disposition of Nonconforming Material
t 2%
,s.U
.... 9 8.
Segregation of Sizes 9.
Identification and control 10.
Confirmation of Issue of Specified Material 11.
Protection from Physical Damage
~
12.
Protection from Contamination 13.
Location and routing of wireways and conduits to provide for necessary separation 14.
Proper bonding or grounding of wireways and conduit 15.
Identification system integrating wireways and conduits with routing requirements fer cable, assuring proper size and type of cable will be routed properly for identified circuits
- 16. Redundancy, separation of redundant circuits, separation of power cables from control or instrument cables, separation of control and safety O
circuits
- 17. Wireway or conduit fill specifying number, size, type, and arrangement of cables to limit heating effects 18.
Cable pul' ling 19.
Cable terminations 20.
Nondestructive tests The following deficiencies and nonconformances were found in the quality control program and procedures for cable:
1.
Confirmation of Issue of Specified Material Quality control procedures which detail this item as a point requiring verification have not been prepared.
2.
Location and Routing of Wireways and Conduits to Provide for Necesso.rv Separation The stated commitments in the FSAR, $a vf. oph 8.2.2.12.c and d, which addresses physical separation, do.'s n;-
1 ear to be procedurally G
controlled since cable trays are b..ing u.. called by the constructor, without benefit of procedures and without approval of the AE prior to the installation of the trays.
1419 169
fh$r
( I
)
' 9 3.
Proper Bondiv; or Groundine of Wirewavs and Conduits Procedures require that each equipment ground bond be checked between the ground grid and the equipment or structure to which the terminal lug is attached and that all field assemblies, bolted connections and welded connections be checked and/or tested for physical integrity and/or electrical continuity.
Procedures to provide qualitative evidence have not becn prepared.
Identification Svstem Intecratine Wirewavs and Conduits with Routing 4.
Recuirements for Cable, Assurin2 the Procer Size and Tvoe of Cable will be Routed Pronerly for Identified Circuits The Gilbert Associates drawing S-211-002, states in part:
'*rhe computer will select the path between the beginning and end trays and will print the route on the computer circuit routing summary and the pull slips".
Contrary to the above, the intermediate locations (path between the beginning and end trays) is not in all cases provided on the computer routing summary and the pull slips.
Procedures defining numbering techniques for field designed trays and correlating responsibilities between partial pull card data and circuit O
schedule provided by Gilbert Associates and completed on site by United Engineers and Constructors have not been prepared.
Separation of Redundant Circuits, Separation of Power Cables 5.
Redundancy, from Control or Instrument Cables. Separation of Control anc Safety Circuits The FSAR, paragraph 8.2.2.12 states in part, " Cabling for redundant components has been identified utilizing four different colors...."
".... cables, conduits, trays...'.
Paragraph 8.2.2.10.g.1 states in part, are color coded to identify their function and/or channel association".
Procedures and/or techniques for color coding of cable has not yet been developed.
Procedures for color coding of cable trays has not been prepared.
Draft QC pro'cedures and check list does not provide for verification that color coding has been perforeed.
Procedures have not been prepared describing the minimum frequency at which trays are to be numbered or frequency of recurrence of color coding.
1419 170
,., + =
, y,-
)
{.'
.14 -
9 6.
Wireway or Conduit Fill Scecifving Number, Size, Type and Arrangement of Cables to Limit Heatine Effects The UE&C draft check list does not provide for verification of physical fill precluding qualitative e;idence at the field level that the design objective loading has not been exceeded.
The Metropolitan Edison construction electrical engin'eer stated that all terminations would be made in the cable spreading room rather than in the control console.
Pigtails have been made up at the fabricator's shop, which will connect to a " states" type terminal block mounted on the cable tray seismic support. The incoming circuit will terminate on this terminal block.
The separations criteria as described in paragraph 8.2.2.10.c ef the FSAR for the engineered safeguards 4160 volt switch gear and 480 volt power centers contains the same language as paragraph 8.2.2.10.d of the FSAR for the 480 volt motor control centers, which is as follows:
" Separation of redundant power systems has been maintained throughout".
Physical separation using a fireproof barrier was found in the case of the 4160 volt switchgear and 480 volt power centers; however, separation of two redundant 480 volt power centers was found to be approximately five feet with no separating barrier.
O S
S O
iai9 i,i
_ _ _ _ _ _ _... _ _..