ML20062C518
| ML20062C518 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 09/18/1978 |
| From: | Greenman E, Mccabe E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20062C516 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-277-78-23, 50-278-78-28, NUDOCS 7811090058 | |
| Download: ML20062C518 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000277/1978023
Text
.
.
..
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
"9
"
50-277/78-23
Report No.
50-278/78-28
50-277
Docket No.
50-278
DPR-d4
License No. OPR-56
Priority
Category
C; C
--
l
Licensee:
Philadelphia Electric Company
2301 Market Street
!
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19101
i
Facility Name: Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3
Inspection at: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Corporate offices)
Inspection conducted: August 23, 1978
i
Inspectors:
f/r[7p
m
E. G. Greenman, Reactor Inspector
date signed
date signed
cate signed
Approved by:
O. O. b O , h
iItohs
E. C. McCabe, Jr., Chief, Reactor Projects
date signed
Section No. 2, RO&NS Branch
,
.
Inscection Summary:
Insoection on Aucust 23, 1978 (Combined Recort No. 50-277/78-23: 50-278/78-28)
Areas Insoected:
Special, announced inspection oy a regionally based inspector
of the licensee's response to IE Circular 78-08 (dated May 31,1978) titled
" Environmental Qualification of Safety-Related Electrical Equipment at Nuclear
Power Plants." The inspection involved 5 inspector-hours at the ccrporate
office by one regionally based inspector.
Results:
No items of noncompliance were identified.
,
)h
2TI 9
z78Q
Region I Fom 12
(Rev. April 77)
. -
-
-
.
.
'
.
.
'
.
.
OETAILS
.
.
1.
Persons Contacted
W. Boyer, Engineer
J. J. Ferencsik, Supervisory Engineer-Nuclear Generation
F. C. Gloeckler, Engineer, QA
V. J. Lucia, Senior Engineer, QA
A. Sellers, Chief, Electrical Engineer
~
W. H. VanBuskirk, Project Engineer
'
All of the above personnel attended the exit interview.
'
2.
Assicnment of Resoonsibility
[
The inspector verified that the licensee had assigned the resconsi-
bility for review of IE Circular 78-08, including evaluation of the
fourteen referenced items in the Circular.
Primary responsibility
for Peach Bottcm 2 and 3 was assigned via memorandum dated June 7,
1978.
Further discussion with licensee representatives indicated
that decartmental subassignments had been made for review of the
referenced Circular as follows:
a.
Engineering Design -- identification of safety-related equip-
ment;
b.
Engineering -- establishment of qualification requirements;
_
Engineering -- document review and verification that safety-
c.
'
relateo equipment meets qualification requirements; and,
'
d.
Engineering -- followup on any documentation not meeting
established requirements.
The licensee's program for verification was confirmed by the inspec-
tor and consists for safety-related equipment inside and outside
.
centainment of identification of all safety-related equipment, the
'
establishment of qualification requirements and qualification of
equipment via documentation peovided by the NSSS vendor, AE and/or
equipment vendor.
No deadline has been established for completion.
A responsible licensee representative stated that review was ex-
pected to be completed by December 31, 1978, for all equipment
!
o
e
e
.
.
.
.
.
3
inside the drywell.
No estimates were available for completion
>
of items exterior to containment.
The licensee stated that no
problems had been identified to date based upon a prelininary
review of safety related equipment outside containment.
The
licensee's ongoing program and status regarding these areas will
be reviewed further during a subsequent inspection.
(277/78-23-
01 and 278/78-28-01)
3.
Licensee Evaluation of the Fourteen References
The inspector asked the licensee if he had completed the evalua-
tion of any of the fourteen referenced items in the Circular.
The responsible licensee representative stated that the references
had been received and evaluated within the context of known prob-
,
lems within the industry related to connectors, penetrations,
.
terminal blocks, limit switches, cable splices and other potential
problems currently under NRC staff review.
The inspector confirmed
the licensee's review by. inspection of the fourteen references which
were in the licensee's possession and annotations thereto.
Evalua-
tion included the licensee's responses to IE Culletins 77-05 and
77-05A concerning use of electrical connector assemblies on safety
related equipment, response dated December 14, 1977,Bulletin 77-06
concerning electrical penetrations response dated December 2,1977,
Bulletin 78-02 regarding Terminal Block Qualification, response
dated February 10, 1978, and Bulletin 78-04 regarding Environmental
Qualification of certain Stem-mounted Limit Switches inside Con-
tainment, response dated March 24, 1978.
4.
Corrective Actions
The inspector asked the licensee if he had planned or taken any
corrective actions to date, as a result of his evaluation of any of
the fourteen referenced items in the Circular.
The licensee stated
that documentation was incomplete with respect to the following
areas; which were reviewed in detail by the inspector.
t
a.
Solice Materials
l
There was no specific data available to prove environmental
l
l
qualifications of polyolefin insulating tubing used in splices
j
in all safety systems inside containment. Similar polyolefin
!
shrink tubes were reportedly qualified by GE in prior 100
i
I
L
1
,
-
.
,
l
'
.
.
-
.
.
4
series penetration testing.
Splices are located in penetra-
tions within 0.125" Al, neoprene gasketed enclosures of the
type qualified at another facility.
The inspector also re-
viewed a letter from GE to Philadelphia Electric dated May 15,
1978, stating that cable . butt splices covered with polyolefin
shrink tube also provides a LOCA qualified insulation.
Data
for GE 100 Series penetration qualification was nonspecific
as to polyolefin type.
The licensee has established a test program through the
'
Franklin Institute and in conformance to.IEEE 323 to demon-
strate qualifications.
These fourteen day tests were scheduled
to commence September 11, 1978.
7
The licensee concluded that the present installation was
adequate pending completion of environmental testing based
upon:
(1) GE qualification of " equivalent" polyolefin tubing
(splices);
(2) Visual inspection of a random sample on May 17, 1978,
indicating good condition;
,
(3) No insulation problems with the current installation,
which has experienced high humidity from steam leaks;
and,
.
(4) No problems by other users checked, including indications
'
from non-nuclear environment exposures coupled with ex-
cellent performance in recent irradiation testing,
b.
Protected Terminal Blocks
There was no specific data available for inspector review to demon-
strate environmental qualification of Buchanan 28-112 one piece
terminal blocks used in safety systems inside containment.
The
manufacturer's literature indicated a maximum service of 1500C.
Terminal blocks are also protected by 0.125" Al, neoprene
gasketed enclosures.
1
The licensee also established a test program through the
Franklin Institute in conformance to IEEE 323 to demonstrate
qualifications of terminal blocks under LOCA environment-
conditions. These 14 day tests were scheduled to commence
September 11, 1978.
>
$
e
-e
- -
-
.
.
-
.
'
~
.
,
i
5
i
The licensee concluded for the reasons stated above that
the preser.t installation was adequate'pending completion of
'
,
environmental testing.
This area (277/78-23-02 and 278/
78-28-02) is considered unresolved pending-the licensee's
demonstration of qualification.
,
c.
Additionc1 Succortive'Occumentation
'
_
.
PECo was recuested and agreed to:
.
(1) Document, and provide to the NRC, the temperature,
r
pressure, and humidity exposure data experienced in
'
'
service, including time involved, and provide a.cor-
relation to 08A exposure;
't
(2) Document and provide data regarding what other environ-
'
ments and users have been checked and anaiyzed, including
i
elements of similarity and correlation to the Peach
Bottom installation.
(3) Determine and document representativeness and sample
.
size for May 17, 1978, visual inspection of installed
splices;
(4) Provide to the NRC an analysis of the two "similar" polyo-
fins based on physical and chemical characteristics with
specific identification of the factors justifying the
conclusion of similarity of response.
The licensee was
<
'
asked to provide this information as soon as possible and
was apprised that NRR materials personnel would review
this data;
(5) Provide a detailed assessment and correlation regarding
to data for enclosed Terminal Blocks and testing) completed
>
by other sources (ex:
Conn Yankee, Westinghouse ;
(6) Maintain contact with RI concerning status of the licensee's
evaluations and conclusions;
(7) Furnish a detailed test plan to RI for review;
'
(S) Demonstrate that both ends of the conductors, not solely
the containment penetration ends, are qualified; and,
,
i
l
(9) Establish a plan to verify that PVC tape has not been
l
used in lieu of polyolefin splices or qualify a taped in-
sta11ation.
l
l
.-
.
-
-.
.
. - .
.=
..
.
. . _ _
.
. . .
u~
-
. .
6
5.
Unresolved Items
Unresolved item: are those items ;or which further information
is required to determine whether they are acceptable or items
,
of noncompliance. An unresolved itemeis contained in paragraph
3 of this report.
6.
Exit Interview
An exit interview was conducted on August 23, 1978, with licensee
representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of
the inspection.
The inspector summarized the purpose and scope
of the inspection and tne findings.
Licensee representatives
acknowledged the inspection findings.
.
O
l
'
..
.
.
-
.