ML20002D683
| ML20002D683 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 12/09/1980 |
| From: | Barrett P, Knop R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20002D680 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-341-80-20, NUDOCS 8101210662 | |
| Download: ML20002D683 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000341/1980020
Text
-
't ,/
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-341/80-20
License No. CPPR-87
Docket No. 50-341
Licensee: Detroit Edison Company
2000 Second Avenue
Detroit, MI 48226
tacility Name: Enrico Fermi Nuclear Station, Unit 2
Inspection Conducted: November 12 - 14, 1980
Re k j
/2!7p/
Inspector:
P. A. Barrett
SC 'Yf
//
'
/g/ 00
Approved By:
R. C. Knop, Chief
I
f
Projects Section 1
Inspection Summary
'
Inspection on November 12-14, 1980 (Report No. 50-341/80-20)
Areas Inspected: Observation of in-process testing of electrical equipment;
,
discussion about . * observation of electrical cable installation activities;
and review of audits concerning electrical activities. The inspection IN_
volved 21 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
i
Results: Of the areas inspected, two items of noncompliance were identified.
(One Severity Level IV, Supplement II
permitting cable installation activities
to continue with a known inadequacy; and one Severity Level VI Supplement
II - not performing actual audits on electrical activities in the plant).
1
,
8101210 Q Q
.
DETAILS
Persons Contacted
E. Wermann, Construction QA
J. C. Ard, Jr., Daniel International Corp. Project Manager
W. C. Morrison, QA Engineer
H. O. Arora, Acting Startup Engineer
T. S. Nickelson, Acting Startup Director
L. B. Collins, Lead Startup Test Engineer - Electrical
E. K. Graybill, Acting Project Manager, L. K. Comstock Co.
J. Mattox, Engineering, L. K. Comstock
B. Seltmann, Quality Control Supervisor, L. K. Comstock
Resident NRC Inspector
B. H. Little
P. M. Byron
All of the above attended the exit interview on November 14, 1980.
Functional or Program Areas Inspected
1.
Observation of In-Process Testing of Electrical Equipment
The RIII inspector observed the in process high potential test of the
secondary windings and the development of the data for the excitation
reference curve for the current transformer located in switchgear bus
j
65F position F10 (associated with the core spray pump). The test was
performed and the data was developed in accordance to Checkout and
Initial Operations Test Procedure #CAIO.000.028 Revision 2.
A discrepancy
.
in the current transformer polarity marks indicated on the construction
'
prints was identified by the licensee and appropriately documented on
Design Deviation Report (nonconformance) No. SUE-0206.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
2.
Observation and Discussion of In-Process Cable Installation Activities
a.
On November 12, 1980 the RIII inspector went into the plant to
observe in the in process installation of a group of instrument
cables installed sumultaneously (bulk pull). The group including
seven Class IE cables (#231275-2k, 231272-2K, 231276-2K, 231273-2K,
255922-2K, 255858-2K, and 255928-2K) and three non-Class IE cables
(#255926, 240105, and 255921).
The group had been partially installed (pulled) and were laid on
the floor to prepare for the next segment of the pull.
-2-
.. .
.
.-_ .
.
_
.__
_ ._
,
I
,
I
-
A discussion, with the personnel involved in the pull, revealed
. *
'
that there had been a problem with this type (bulk) of pull the
week before, which resulted in a broken cable. The problem was
.
that a safety device (tensiometer or pulling link) used to prevent
i
excessive tension on cables pulled through conduit, could not be
attached at intermediate pull points in the routing. Thus, the
cables were pelled by hand without a safety device. Quality Control
,
l
personnel determined that the individual cables might be overtensioned
'
and notified Detroit Edison Engineering. The instructions from Eng-
ineering were to continue the pull and document the pull activities on
a DDR (nonconformance report). The pull was continued and cable
i
- 255849-2C broke in half. The pull activities were then stopped by
,
QC and DDR #1034 dated November 7, 1980, was initiated describing the
above events. As of November 12, 1980, correction action to DDR
- 1034 had not been dispositioned or taken.
The discussion with the QC personnel involved with the bulk pull
of November 12, 1980 indicated that the same deficient practice of
pulling part of the cables by hand without a safety device would
be allowed for the November 12, 1980 bulk cable pull. Failure to
j
properly implement the quality assurance program, in that corrective
measures were not taken t: a Known deficiency before proceeding with
i
the work activity, is contrary to the requirements of 10 Cf8 50,
Appendix B, Criterion II and the Enrico Fermi Unit 2 Quality Assurance
Manual, Section 1.0.1 as described in Appendix A to the transmittal
letter to this report.
(341/80-20-01)
The licensee will take the following actions relative to the above
noncompliance:
1
(1) Determine how many other cables have been installed in this
deficient manner and take commensurate corrective action.
(2) Document the stop work order issued on November 13, 1980 con-
cerning these installation activities.
(3) Determine the reason QC decided to allow the deficient pull
activities to continue; determine any other activities that
,
,
may be effected by a similar decision; and take measures to
preclude this type of a decision in the future.
b.
The RIII inspector discussed the controls used by the licensee to
assure that the cable pulls links would prevent excessive tensions
on cables during installation. The electrical contractor had dis-
covered that at one time, links had been identified onsite which were
not traceable to an approved vendor. The contractors' corrective
action was to retrieve and hold all of the questionable links.
The
,
above actions are documented on LKC Field Surveillance Correction
Report #1656.
,
1
The licensee has agreed to take the following additional
actions:
1
i
1
-3-
.
- . . - - - - - -
-.
- - .
.
- - - . . - - .
,
- -
.
(1)
Identify any safety cable that was installed using the question-
<
able links and take any necessary corrective actions.
(2) Determine how the unapproved links got onto the site and
take appropriate actions to prevent recurrence.
This item is unresolved (341/80-20-02).
From a review of link quality certifications and a discussion with
the electrical contractor, the pull links presently onsite appeared
to qualify to break at an adequate tension to protect the cables
being installed.
3.
Audit Review
The RIII inspector reviewed the audits performed by Detroit Edison and
Daniel International of L. K. Comstock (the electrical contractor) during
the past 14 months.
(August 1980 to October 1980)
Audits were available in the areas of purchasing, nonconformances,
fabrication shop activities, design changes, organization, procurement,
and warehouse storage.
A log was reviewed which indicated several surveillances of specific
in plant activities performed by L. K. Comstock. However, the licensee
could not provide a comprehensive audit of the L. K.
Comstock in plant
construction activities which had been performed during the past 14
months. This is contrary to the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B,
Criterion XVIII and the Enrico Fermi Unit 2 Quality Assurance Manual,
Section 19.0.1 as described in Appendix A to the transmittal letter to
this report.
(341/80-20-03)
Unresolved Items
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order
to ascertain whether or not they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance,
or deviations. An unresolved item disclosed during this inspection is discussed
in paragraph 2.b.
Exit Interview
The inspectors met with the licensee representatives on November 14, 1980.
The inspectors summarized the scope and findings of the inspection. The
licensee acknowledged the findings as reported.
_4_
_