ML20215C579
| ML20215C579 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 11/24/1986 |
| From: | Haynes J ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE CO. (FORMERLY ARIZONA NUCLEAR |
| To: | Kirsch D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| References | |
| ANPP-39135-JGH, DER-86-30, NUDOCS 8612150246 | |
| Download: ML20215C579 (5) | |
Text
-
rQ b$
"9Rew Arizona Nuclear Power Project Jg gg A D n-P.O. BOX $2034 e PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85072-2034 REGlon y November 24, 1986 ANPP-39135-JGH/DJW/DRL-92.11 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region V 1450 Maria Lane - Suite 210 Welnut Creek, CA 94596-5368 Attention:
Mr. D. F. Kirsch, Director Division of Reactor Safety and Projects Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS)
Unit 3 Docket No. 50/530
Subject:
Interim Report - DER 86-30 A 50.55(e) Potentially Reportable Deficiency Relating to Installed Fuses. Terminal Blocks, and Wire Which May be Unqualified File 86-006-216; D.4.33.2
Reference:
Telephone Conversation between R. C. Sorenson and D. R. Larkin on November 4,1986 (Initial Notification - DER 86-30)
Dear Sir:
The NRC was notified of a potentially reportable deficiency in the referenced telephone conversation. At that time, it was estimated that a determination of reportability would be made within thirty (30) days.
(December 4, 1986)
Due to the extensive investigation and evaluation required, an Interim Report is attached. It is now expected that this information will be finalized by January 27,198j at which time a complete report will be submitted.
Y Very truly yours.
W J. G. Hay es Vice President Nuclear Production r
JGII/DRL:kp Attachment ec: See Page Two 8612150246 861124 PDR ADOCK 05000530 g
't 2Ea7
6
- '..~
- i ~.
1-DER'86-30'- Interim Report.
-Mr. D. F. Kirsch Director Page Two-November-24, 1986
'ANPP-39135-JGH/DJW/DRL-92.11 cc 1 J. M; Taylor.
Office of Inspection andL Enforcement U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Washington, D. C..20555 A.' C. Gehr~
(4141).
.R. P. Zimmerman ~ (6295)
Records Center Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 1100 circle 75 -Parkway - Suite 1500 LAtlanta, Georgia 30339-
. 4.
l
y
~
-l.
J x
.~
.+
INTERIM REPORT 86-30 '
POTENTIAL REPORTABLE DEFICIENCY
-ARIZONA NUCLEAR POWER PROJECT p
PVNGS UNIT 3
~
I..
' Potential Problem-I ANPP CAR.CP86-0182 identified three, potentia 11y' safety.significant, conditions where non qualified components were used in safety, related, quality class Q, applications. The items were :Insta11ed' either ' as replacement parts for qualified components (fuses and terminal blocks) or as part of a modification (wiring).
LA.
Fuses:
EER.86-SD-042-(6/13/86) identifies that 20 non-qualified; fuses.
(Littlefuse P/N 273.500) were removed from storage. Two or more of-the fuses were installed in Unit 2 ERF Isolation cabinets in the control room to function as 1E/non-1E isolation devices as replacement for qualified devices (Littlefuse P/N 262.500).
'B.
Terminal Blocks:
GE series EB25. terminal blocks procured for mild environment IE use, were installed inside IE Limitorque valve operators for Unit 3 safety injection ~ shutdown cooling valves located inside the containment (harsh environment).
C.. Wire:
Noa-1E, non-qualified GE Vulkene switchboard wire may have been used in Units 1, 2, & 3 safety related applications including components located in harsh environment areas. ECE-ZZ-A003, Rev._0, dated:
2/28/05, had previously evaluated this wire and limited its use to non-harsh areas of the plant II.
Approach To and Status of Proposed Resolution The overall evaluation of the deficiency is still continuing. However, a preliminary evaluation of the suitability of the various components in question has been completed.
A.
Fuses:
The fuses are evaluated in ECE-SD-A003 Rev.1, dated 11/14/86. This evaluation has determined that the replacement fuses have similar electrical characteristics and thus will perform their required safety function in the same manner as the original fuses. The primary difference between the two fuses is their mechanical construction.
jh P
1
. ;v,
~n
's
(,(
s.-
t.
- The qualified fuse is a Mil Spec 'iten manufactured with. a metal case as a high-reliability. device. The replacement fuse.is a commercial grade item that uses:a plastic case but appears to be
~
similarfin design. Since(the installation of' these-fuses is-in a mild environment and the fuses themselves are physically small-
-(0.25" X 0.50").. low mass (< 1 gram), passive -devices no
.significant environmental oriseismic concerns exist.
The commercial grade. fuses:(P/N 273.500); installed are therefore considered ~ to.be acceptable as temporary replacements for the-qualified' fuses (P/N 262.500) required-by the design..
3B; Terminal: Blocks:
4
' The terminal. blocks are' evaluated in ECE-SI-A013', Rev. O, dated 11/10/86.- This evaluation has determined ~that 'the EB25 series blocks, originally procured for mild environment use, have the
~
L' '
same1 critical. characteristics (size, ~ material, and mounting) as
- the now obsolete EB5 series commercial grade blocks originally _
qualified 'for harsh environment:use.
The.EB5 series were qualified for PVNGS with their cover, cover screws; and cover hinges removed. Visual inspection hes verified that the' EB25 series blocks installed in valves 3JSIAUV651 and 3JSiBUV652 also have these items removed..
The commercial grade EB25 series blocks installed are therefore considered to be acceptable as permanent, replacements for the previously qualified commercial grade EB5" series blocks.-
C.
Wire:
The wire is evaluated in ECE-ZZ-089,,Rev. 2.
This evaluation of the GE Vulkene switchboard wire, type SIS, SI-57275 is an extension of the evaluation performed in ECE-ZZ-A003, Rev; O 4
which limited the use of this wire to non-harsh areas of the.
r plant. ECE-ZZ~A003,- Rev. O has been superseded by ECE-ZZ-089, Rev. 2.
[
In order to determine the location (s) of the non qualified wire the following reviews were performed (a) An HMIS printout was generated identifying all ROS's issued for C/I 4413-000004 and 4413-000001.
4 (b) 'ANPP Maintenance identified work orders which referenced the ROS numbers for the subject wire.
(c) ANPP Engineering evaluated the equipment, identified on the work orders, to determine the environmental qualifications for the specific plant locations.
The reviews performed above-have concluded that the subject wire was not used in any 1E application within containment, however it was used in IE applications within MSSS and has been evaluated per ECE-ZZ-089, Rev. 2 to show that it meets the necessary environmental qualifications.
b I-i
,,7.,. s t 3
..f.
4 J
' The GE Vulken'e Supreme wire (SI-57279)'which -is qualified to
~
IEEE 323-74 is-identical to GE Vulkene. (SI-57275) wire; except
' "the GE Vulkene -(SI-57275) wire is ! insulated with chlorinated
. flame retardant, as compared to Vulkene. Supreme 'which uses s' non-chlorinated flame retardant. Both products make use of al icrosslinked polyethylene insulation.
An evaluation, using +.he ANPP EQ parameters. of the MSSS.. and the -
GE.Vulkene Supreme. wire'qualificatio'nLreport shows that-the GE
'Vulkene' (SI-57275)' wire.will: perform its required safety.
function in-harsh environments, outside the containment. '. This evaluation considered both normal -ambient.(120*F)L and abnormal
.300*F) temperatures, radiation exposures-(40 yr +L accident T1D),
.and moisture..
1 To ' assure a conservative' margin between the evaluated wire l
capabilities and the harsh environmental parameters evaluated, a maximus'of 30% ofi thel expected 111fe' was:used for the qualified.
life. On this. basis / the limiting paramfeter' ' thermal life..
resultsiin a qualified life.of approximately:45; years;
' The GE Vulkene1(SI-57275) wire"is therefore considered to be an acceptable replacement for qualified wire in harsh environments outside of.the containment.
D..
Units 1.& 2 Operation:
. Based on the results of the investigation to date and.on the.
results of the evaluations performed, continued use of' the components addressed herein does not pose a-safety hazard to the 4
continued operation of Units.1 and 2.
E.
Summary:
- A. review of approved ECE's has been performed to identify areas where restrictions may have been required.- A review will be conducted to assure that the-restricted material has been used only in authorized locations. In addition to the specific review for each ECE, an overall review of procedures to implement ECE disposition is under evaluation to identify programmatic problems.
A final report will be prepared upon completion of this review and determination of reportability and corrective action.
.III. Projected Completion of Corrective Action and Submittal of othe Final Report The complete evaluation and final report are forecast to be completed by January 27, 1987.
2 s'
._,,.._a._.,,,.__.,__,._.
.. _ _,. _,...,,,,..,,,, _... _....