ML20070M434
| ML20070M434 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 01/17/1983 |
| From: | Root R WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM |
| To: | Engelken R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| References | |
| REF-SSINS-6820 G-01-83-0023, G-1-83-23, IEB-82-04, IEB-82-4, NUDOCS 8301250203 | |
| Download: ML20070M434 (2) | |
Text
m s
Washington Public Power Supply System P.O. Box 968 3000 GeorgeWashingtonWay Richland, Washington 99352 (509)372-5000 January 17, 1983 G01-83-0023 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region V 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596 Attention:
R.H. Engelken
Subject:
NUCLEAR PROJECT N0. 1 IE BULLETIN N0. 82-04, DEFICIENCIES IN PRIMARY CONTAINMENT ELECTRICAL PENETRATION ASSEMBLIES
Reference:
NRC IEB-82-04, dated December 3, 1982 IEB-82-04 is not applicable to the WNP-1/4 Project. All WNP-1/4 electrical penetration assemblies were furnished by Westinghouse Electric Company.
The bulletin identified concerns related to electrical penetrations supplied by Bunker Ramo Company.
We consider this item closed.
R.W. Root Program Director CAB:cb cc:
G. Valentenyi-UE&C-806 A. Medici-UE&C-806 KJ Iverson-UE&C-898 FDCC-899 Document Control Desk-Washington, D.C.
f 8301250203 830117
~
PDR ADOCK 05000397
,.0 PDR
e 3
STATEOFWASHINGTON)
COUNTY OF BENTON R. W. Root, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: That he is the Program Director, WNP-1/4, for the WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM, the applicant herein; that he is authorized to submit the foregoing on behalf of said applicant; that he has read the foregoing and knows the contents thereof; and believes the same to be true to the best of his knowledge.
DATED 4,-o/ /,1983
/
' R. W. Rbot On this day personal y appeared before me R. W. ROOT to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he signed the same as his free act and deed for the uses and pur-poses therein mentioned.
i GIVEN under my hand and seal this /7
_ day of /r a /fo
,1983 l/
U y
i Nota 79 Public.in and for the State of Washington Residing at /8/ /
f///
0)b - /A s T
/
tGC DISTRIBUT10M
+,
h,k... R Toot..
817 CR Bryant-SPA.
399 SSINS No.:
6820 RB Glasscock..
280 OMB No.: 3150-0094 DO O'Sullivan.
2801
\\
Expiration Date:
11/30/85 0
o a>="<
38s
<91/ -a2- 0.s./7 88 82-o4
."C Carrigan 818 PH666Aivi biRECTOR CR Edwards.
819 UNITED STATES WNP 1/4 CS Organ....
823 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Ar,Hosler...
823 0FFICE.0F INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT DEC 101982 P/J Root 821l WASHINGTON, D.C.
20555
~3' RF itazurkiewicz
. 842.
JGC Cr.,-,,y..,-. - a 9 9 December 3, 1982
]
OPci
. 847 f
DEFICIENCIES IN PRIMARY CONTAINMENT ELECTh p
IE BULLETIN NO. 82-04:
PENETRATION ASSEMBLIES C
T
- 1 h!.Q. I:7'Y 2
4 Addressees:
.j All nucleer power reactor facilities holding an operating license (OL) or c7n struction permit (CP).
~*
~
Purcose:
The purpose of this bulletin is to inform CP holders and licensees about findings from a joint Region III, Region IV, and IE study concerning electrical penetrations supplied by the Bunker Ramo Company.
It was concluded that there are potential generic safety implications at a limited number of plants.
Therefore, we ask all recipients of this bulletin to review the information P
herein for applicability to their facilities and (1) to take appropriate action w'ith respact to deficiencies found if their plants utilize hard epoxy contain-ment electrical penetration assemblies manufactured by the Bunker Ramo Company or (2) submit reports stating that such assemblies are not used in their facilities.
Description of Circumstances:
Several deficiencies in containment electrical penetrations supplied by Bunker Ramo, have been identified. A summary of these deficiencies is'provided below:
1.
On January 15, 1979, Consumer Power Com9any submitted 10 CFR 50.55(e) report No. 78-12 for -the Midland nuclear facility identifying deficiencies associated with #10 AWG and smaller wire terminations located in the inboard terminal boxes of Bunker Ramo penetration assemblies.
The defi-ciencies identified included improper lug crimps, incorrect lug types, and loose connections on terminal blocks.
These deficiencies were attributed, in part, to an inexperienced employee at Bunker Ramo.
1 2.
On March 26, 1980, Union Electric Company submitted 10 CFR 50.55(e) report No. 80-03 for the Callaway nuclear facility identifying deficiencies associated with electrical penetration assemblies supplied by Bunker Ramo.
The deficiencies included improperly crimped lugs and improperly identi-fled penetration cables.
During hand pull tests, at least 38 wires sepa-rated from their lugs.
It was reported that this deficiency resulted when Bunker Ramo overcrimped and undercrimped lugs.
O n os '9 o w?
- t. "^at" 89s K. IVERSON 52D
{
6;CaisGidu V. MANI 520 C. MILLER 520 ORM 847 3
W. TAYLOR 1
+
W"
\\
a IES 82-04 December 3, 1982 Page 2 of 6 3.
On June 12, 1980, the NRC was informed by Standardized Nuclear Unit Power Plant Systems (SNUPPS) that additional inspections at the Wolf Creek nuclear facility identified further concerns regarding the quality and integrity of Bunker Ramo electrical penetration terminations.
Deft-ciencies identified at the Wolf Creek facility included improperly crimped lugs and incorrectly sized lugs.
4.
On October 2, 1980, Commonwealth Edison submitted 10 CFR 50.55(e) report No. 80-02 for the LaSalle County Station Unit 2 facility identifying cracked or missing insulation (exposing bare copper) on small-diameter conductors as they enter / exit the epoxy module portion of the Bunker Ramo electrical penetrations.
The report stated, in part, "The cracking was determined to have resulted from stress points in the insulation created I
by a mechanical bond between the potting compound (used to form the over-mold portion of the module) and the insulation.
Movement of the conductors entering or exiting the modules produced cracks along the stress points."
5.
On March 31, 1982, the NRC was advised through a 10 CFR 21 report.that deficiencies have been identified in Bunker Ramo electrical penetrations installed at the Midland nuclear facility.
The deficiencies involve #2,
- 6, #8, #10, #14, and #16 AWG splices and cracks in the insulation of some conductors as they emerge from certain types of modules..The deficiencies were reported to have occurred when site personnel moved cables to inspect 40k for rodent damage.
6.
On April 8, 1982, Consumers Power Compa.1y submitted 10 CFR 50.55(e) report No. 82-02 for the Midland nuclear facility identifying deficiencies in Bunker Ramo electrical penetrations.
The identified deficiencies included cracks in conductor insulation at the conductor-module interface (result-ing in some exposure of the mcdule copper conductors) and inadequately j
crimped butt splices (resulting in several #2 AWG butt splices being pulled apart).
These deficiencies were observed in installed electrical penetrations.
In addition, similar deficiencies were observed in crated electrical penetrations and spare module assemblies stored in warehouse facilities.
The cracked insulation was reported to have probably been caused by a chemical / mechanical reaction between the module materials, mechanical stresses resulting from the module design, and a lack of explicit handling / packing instructions reflecting the fragility of the i
electrical penetrations / modules.
The inadequately crimped butt splices were reportedly caused by a breakdown in the fabrication / design of the module assemnlies.
The above deficiencies have all been identified on Bunker Ramo electrical penetrations utilizing a hard epoxy module design.
In addition to the above construction sites, Bunker Ramo has identified the Comancne Peak, Byron and Braidwood sites as using this design.
These deficiencies could result in failures of Class 1E equipment essential to the safe operation and shutdown of nuclear facilities.
The potential failures which could occur include electri-cal short-circuits, localized circuit overheating, adjacent circuit cross-talk, 00E and circuit discontinuities.
I 1
r
- EB 82-04 December 3, 1982 Page 3 of 6 In addition to the above documented deficiencies associated with nuclear facilities under construction, a deficiency in Bunker Ramo electrical penetra-tions utilizing a sof t epoxy module design has recently been identified at Davis-Besse, an operating nuclear facility.
Davis-Besse has determined that spurious alarms are caused by intermittent voltage crops within the electrical penetration module assemblies.
To determine the cause of the voltage drops, two module assemblies have been removed during the current r'efueling cutage and will be shipped to a laboratory for testing.
Calvert Cliffs, Trojan, and Arkansas plants also use the soft epoxy module design.
A supplement to this oulletin will be issued, if deemed necessary, when the Davis-Besse laboratory results are available.
Actions to Be Taken by Holders of Ooeratino Licenses or Construction Permits 1.
Plants Under Construction and in Operation If Bunker Ramo electrical penetrations having module assemblies which utilize the hard epoxy module. design are not yet installed in safety-related systems at your facility (plants under construction) or are non-installed spare units (operating plants), the following actions are requested:
a.
Inspect all supplier provided electrical penetration terminal boxes and verify that the conductor terminations are satisfactory (correct gggg lug sizes, proper crimps, and no loose connections).
b.
Inspect all electrical penetration conductors as they enter and exit penetration modules and verify the integrity of the insulation around the conductors.
It may be necessary to remove the penetration modules from the assembly to perform this inspection, and removal will.be necessary to conduct the examination discussed in Item c below.
c.
Conduct detailed examinations of all supplier provided in-line butt splices having a wire size of #2 AWG and smaller, and ascertain acceptability of these connections.
2.
Plants Under Construction If Bunker Ramo electrical penetration assemblics utilizing the hard epoxy module design are installed in safety-related systems at your facility, tne following actions are requested:
a.
Inspect the accessible
- portions of all installed assecblies as described in Items la and lb above.
'Thrcugnout this bulletin the accessible portions are considered to be all of the suoplier provided electrical terminations (see Item la) and those parts of the penetration modules (Item lb) that can be inspected while the assemblies are in place.
IEB 82-04 December 3, 1982 Page 4 of 6 Remove a sample of penetration modules from the assemblies and b.
Minimum inspect the sample as described in Item Ib and Ic above.
sample size considered acceptable shall be the greater of two modules or 10% of the modules for each wire size.
If failures are identified in either the non-installed assemblies (Items Ib and Ic) or in the sample from the installed assemblies, the sample size shall be appropriately increased.
3.
Plants in Oceration:
If Bunker Ramo electrical penetration assemblics utilizing the hard epoxy module design are installed in safety-related systems at your facility, you are requested to review past operational and related maintenance records of these electrical penetration units for circuit functionability problems similar to those discussed in this bulletin.
If such problems have occurred, or if the inspection of spare 3 assemblies in accordance with Item 1 have identified deficiencies, then the following acticns are requested:
Provide a basis for continued plant operation if problems as discussed a.
in this bulletin are identified.
03velop a plan for inspection of the installed assemblies. This plan b.
sho'uld address the types of problems identified by past operational history and/or the inspection of non-icstalled spares.
The plan should identify the wire sizes to be examined.
(1) If problems were only identified in accessible portions of the assembly then the sample may be restricted to that portion.
(2) If problems ir,cluded inaccessible portions, then the sample shall include inaccessible portions of the assembly.
This will require removal of the module from the assembly.
Repairs to conductor terminations, module insulation and butt splices 4.
identified as unacceptable under provisions of Items 1, 2 or 3 above shall be performed in accordance with appropriate procedures.
Initiate replacement or repair of any supplier provided conductor termi-nation, module insulation, or in-line butt splice if they are determined to be unacceptable based on the inspections and examinations discussed in Items 1 through 3 above.
If the repairs involve recrimping of connec-tion (s), such actions must be supported by documentation containing the results of the qualification tests conducted to support these corrective actions. This is to include pull tests on similarly installed sample connections from your facility.
An acceptable alternative would be type I
M
s' IEB 82-04 s
P Cecember 3, 1982 9)
Page 5 of 6 tests of recrimped connections of each wire size, performed by the con-nector manufacturer. These sample connections must be of similar para-meters (i.e., wire size, connector type, qualified crimping tool and crimping procedures, etc.) as those of the connectors in cuestion.
Replacement of suspect connections with r,ther types of connectors must 3
also be supported by similar qualification occumentation.
5.
Ccaplete the actions specified by this bulletin and provide a written report within 90 days of the date of this bulletin that either:
i States that no Bunker Ramo electrical penetration which use the hard a.
epoxy module design are ir. stalled or planned to be installed in safety-related systems at your facility. (No further action is needed), or b.
(1) Provides the results of those actions discussed in Items la, Ib, Ic, and 4 above, as they apply to penetration assemblies identi-fied as either spare units or units not yet installed.
(2) Provides the results of those actions discussed in Items 2 and 4 above, as they apply to plants under construction.
The report must be submitted prior to issuance of an OL, if such action is contemplated within the 90 day period following the date of issuance of this bulletin.
(3) Provides the results of those actions discussed in Items 3a, 3b, and 4 above, as they apply to operating plants, including your plan and schedule for completing the required inspections, and also provides your basis for continued operation.
6.
Prcvide a report describing the results of the inspections discussed in Item 3b and addressed by the plan described in the report specified in 5b(3) above, within 60 days of comple ; ion of the inspections.
The written reports required by Items Sa, 5b(1), 5b(2), 5b(3), and 6 above shall be submitted to the appropriate Regional Administrator under oath or affirmation under provisions of Section 182a, Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as amendeo. The original copy of the cover letters and a copy of the reports shall be transmitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555 for reproduction and distribution.
This request for information was approved by the Office of Management and Budget under clearance number 3150-0094 which expires on November 30, 1985.
Comments on burden and duplication should be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Reports Management, Room 3208, New Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20503.
4 t
1 1
n 3=ne.
l IEB 82-04 December 3, 1932 Fa;e 5 Of 5 f
7 -' s e::'f:
o,c e netpful to tne NRC in evaluating the cost of impleme tin:
rmatien ng this bulle-
- 1. Utility staff time to perform requested inspectio
- 2. Radiation exposure attributed to requested inspecti n.
- 3. Utility staff time spent to prepare written respo ons.
nses.
If you have any questions regarding this matter Administrator of the appropriate NRC Regional Offi, please contact the Regiona listed below.
ce, or the technical contact 44tedk M
Ri hard C. DeYoung, Efrepy'ff ice o Y
Technical Centact:
V. D. Thomas 301-492-4755 Attacnment:
1.
List of Recently Issued IE Bulletins c
I l
6