ML20039F406

Final Deficiency Rept Re Incorrectly Installed Class IE 250-volt Battery,Initially Reported 811202.New Battery Installation Will Be Purchased from Exide

ML20039F406
Person / Time
Site:	Columbia
Issue date:	12/29/1981
From:	Matlock R WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
To:	Engelken R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
References
10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, GO2-81-0558, GO2-81-558, NUDOCS 8201120425
Download: ML20039F406 (2)

Text

.__

a' . Docket No. 50-397 j

50.55(e) Report RECEIVED Hnc Washington Public Power Supply System P.O. Box 9SB 3000GeorgeWashingtonWay Richland Washington 9935g(50g7 -5 Docket No. 50-397 RECid.4 V CE December 29, 1981 Responds to: NA G02-81-0558 Response required by: NA o

• Hr. R. H. Engelken p

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region V . pECEpjg 6 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 & J442 _

Walnut Creek, California 94596 _~ 44, 2/pgg . -

Subject:

NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 1 e a, 10CFR50.55(e) #176 250 VOLT D.C. BATTERY N/ _ .,

tu In accordance with provisions of 10CFR50.55(e), your office was advised by telephone on December 2, 1981, of a potentially reportable condition concerning 250 Volt D.C. Battery.

Attached is a final report on the subject condition.

Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact R. T.

Johnson at (509) 377-2501 extension 2712.

l R. G. Matlock Program Director WNP-2 RGM/RLH/kh

Attachment:

1. Final Report cc: WS' Chin BPA RA Feil.NRC Resident Inspector, WNP-2 A Forrest, Burns and Roe HAP 0 ND Lewis NRC J Plunkett NUS Corp.

RE Snaith Burns and Roe NY V Stello NRC WNP-2 Files a -

\EO

'8 2 0112 0126lj Sth 1 el

ATTACletENT' 1 FINAL REPORT WASHINGTON PUS'IC

_ POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM DOCKET NO. 50-397 LICENSE NO. CPPR-93 10CFRSO.55(e) #176 250 VOLT D.C. BATTERY The Exide FHC-29 116 Cell Class 1E battery installation was incorrectly installed due to over torquing which was discovered during the torquing process. The terminals and intercell connectors were severely deformed and at least two posts have hori: ental cracks covering approximately 50% of the cross sectional area of the posts.

The Exide representative who inspected the battery recommended that it be replaced for the following reasons:

1. The battery % condition is questionable due to an extensive stand on open circuit without proper maintenance.

The first freshening charge was given after standing better than 21 years on open circuit.

Present cell voltage based on 9-9-81 inspection indicates that there are two cells (#45 and #99) with low float voltages.

2. All cell posts deformed, with two cell posts being stress fractured, plus posts were filed to eliminate distortion to allow surface contact. Suspect other posts may have internal damage similar to the obvious post crack.

Based on a review of data supplied by the Exide representative, we have concluded that this battery 116-FHC-29, is no longer a reliable product to be utilized in a Class IE application. The deficiencies could have resulted in failure of the batteries to operate; therefore, under the provisions of 10CFR50.55(e) this is a reportable condition.

On the reconnendation of Exide, the Supply System (Test and Startup) is purchasing a new battery installation from Exide. This concludes our final report.

__ - _.