ML20151W171: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Adams | |||
| number = ML20151W171 | |||
| issue date = 04/09/1988 | |||
| title = Insp Rept 50-354/88-03 on 880126-29.Violation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Environ Qualification Program & Licensee Response & Resolutions to Equipment Concerns Identified in SER | |||
| author name = Anderson C, Paolino R | |||
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) | |||
| addressee name = | |||
| addressee affiliation = | |||
| docket = 05000354 | |||
| license number = | |||
| contact person = | |||
| document report number = 50-354-88-03, 50-354-88-3, IEIN-83-72, IEIN-84-44, IEIN-84-57, IEIN-85-039, IEIN-85-040, IEIN-85-052, IEIN-85-39, IEIN-85-40, IEIN-85-52, IEIN-86-003, IEIN-86-053, IEIN-86-3, IEIN-86-53, NUDOCS 8805030316 | |||
| package number = ML20151W163 | |||
| document type = INSPECTION REPORT, NRC-GENERATED, INSPECTION REPORT, UTILITY, TEXT-INSPECTION & AUDIT & I&E CIRCULARS | |||
| page count = 15 | |||
}} | |||
See also: [[see also::IR 05000354/1988003]] | |||
=Text= | |||
{{#Wiki_filter:- | |||
. | |||
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION | |||
REGION I | |||
Report No. 50-354/88-03 | |||
Docket No. 50-354 | |||
License No. NPF-57 Priority - Category C | |||
Licensee: Public Service Electric & Gas Company | |||
P.O. Box 236 | |||
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 | |||
Facility Name: Hope Creek Unit 1 Nuclear Power Plant | |||
Inspection At: Hope Creek Unit 1 | |||
Inspection Conducted: January 26-29, 1988 | |||
Inspectors: //h U/-2 / | |||
date | |||
' | |||
R.J~. f aolino, Senior Reactor Engineer PSS/EB | |||
Other Participants and Contributors to the report include: | |||
D. Brousseau, Consultant - Sandia National Laboratory | |||
R. Carpenter, Consultant - Idaho National Engineering Laboratory | |||
A. Finkel, Senior Reactor Engineer - OPS /RI | |||
R. Moist, Equipment Qualification and Test Engineer - NRR/HQ | |||
R. Vanderbeek, Consultant - Idaho National Engineering Laboratory | |||
Approved by: . . / | |||
C.J. AKderson, Chief, Plant Systems date | |||
Section - EB/0RS | |||
Inspection Summary: Inspection on January 26-29, 1988 (Inspection Report | |||
Number 50-354/88-03) | |||
Areas Inspected: Announced inspection to: 1) review licensee's Environmental | |||
Qualification Program and verify its implementation in accordance with | |||
10 CFR 50.49 requirements for maintaining the qualification status of | |||
electrical equipment in a harsh environment; 2) review licensee's response | |||
and resolutions to equipment concerns identified in the NRC Safety Evaluation | |||
Report; and, 3) verification of installed configuration for EQ electricat | |||
equipment selected from EQ Master List. | |||
'805030316 | |||
8 s80427 | |||
PDR ADOCK 05000354 | |||
g DCD | |||
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ | |||
. | |||
2 | |||
Results: The licensee's EQ program was examined in detail and found to be in | |||
compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.49 except for certain | |||
deficiencies identified as follows: | |||
a) EQ files (J-313, J-601 and E-171) were identified with whiteout and changes | |||
that were not initialed or dated by person making the changes as required | |||
by procedure No. VPN-NSP-07, section 8.2.1. This item is a violation | |||
of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V. | |||
b) Files are identified by purchase order numbers, making them dif ficult to | |||
audit since the EQ files contain unrelated items purchased on that | |||
particular purchase order. Qualification support data is lumped into the | |||
one file and are not segregated according to application. This item is | |||
unresolved pending NRC review of licensee corrective action. | |||
c) Dirt and debris was identified in junction boxes. This item is | |||
unresolved, pending NRC review of licensee determination of extent of | |||
problems. | |||
. | |||
._ _-____ ___ ___ _ | |||
. - | |||
_ | |||
q | |||
q; , | |||
* | |||
* | |||
. | |||
s | |||
' | |||
, | |||
DETAILS | |||
1.0. Persons Contacted | |||
, | |||
, | |||
1^.1 Public Service Electric & Gas Company | |||
E. Addill, Electrical Planner | |||
R. Beard, Procurement Engineering S'upervisor .: | |||
P. Benini, Principal Engineer | |||
P. Blum,~ Observer ,, | |||
* J.T. Boettger, Assistant Vice President ' | |||
* R.H. Burricelli, General Manager Engineering and Plant Betterment | |||
* R. Donges, Licensing Engineer | |||
* J. Duffy, Senior Engineer | |||
R. Fein, Procurement Engineer | |||
J. Fisher, Station QA.-Supervisor | |||
* S.F. Hilditch, Jr; Senior-Staff QA Enginee'r | |||
* C.W. Lambert, Nuclear Engineering Sciences Manager | |||
* S. La_Bruna, General Manager Hope Creek Station i | |||
M. La Vecchia, Principal QA Engineer | |||
R. Leach, Electrical Planner | |||
* L.K. Miller, Manager Nuclear Engineering Services | |||
* W.E. Mokuid, Senior Maintenance Supervisor ' | |||
* I. Nag, Senior Staff Engineer | |||
B.A. Preston, Manager Licensing and Reliability | |||
L.A. Reiter, General Manager Licensing and Reliability , | |||
M. Rosensweig, Manager QA Engineering and Procurement ' | |||
* J. Rucki, I&C Systems Engineer - Electrical , | |||
, R.J. Smith, EQ Engineer | |||
,* + | |||
M. Sullivan, I&C Group Leader | |||
J. Thompson, Systems Engineer ; | |||
* F.Y. Thomson, Principal Engineer | |||
* D.J. Vito, Senior Licensing Engineer ; | |||
M. Woloski, Senior Staff Engineer [ | |||
> | |||
> | |||
1.2 Consultants [ | |||
j * K.L. Bar, Asta Engineering | |||
< | |||
* J. Bruce, Asta Engineering | |||
j' * D.P. Ganguly, Asta Engineering | |||
* J. Lariviere, Proto-Power Corporation | |||
: , | |||
' U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission | |||
1.3 ; | |||
* R.W. Borchardt, Senior Resident Inspector | |||
* C.J. Anderson, Chief, Plant System Section - EB/DRS | |||
, | |||
' * Denotes personnel present at exit meeting of January 29, 1988. | |||
4 | |||
; | |||
b | |||
; | |||
i | |||
o j | |||
_ _ _ _ _ | |||
. | |||
. | |||
4 | |||
2.0 Purpose | |||
The purpose of this inspection was: 1) to review the licensee's | |||
implementation of a program to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.49 for | |||
the Hope Creek Unit 1 facility; 2) to review licensee's response to NRC's | |||
Safety Evaluation; and, 3) verify component installed configuration of | |||
specific EQ equipment selected from the Master List. | |||
3.0 Background | |||
In February 1980, the NRC asked near-term operating license (0L) applicants | |||
to review and evaluate the environmental qualification of each item of | |||
safety-related electrical equipment and to identify the degree to which | |||
their qualification programs were in compliance with the staff positions | |||
discussed in NUREG-0588. | |||
A final rule on environmental qualification of electrical equipment | |||
important to safety for Nuclear Power Plants became effective on | |||
February 22, 1983. This rule, 10 CFR 50.49, specifies the requirements | |||
to be met for demonstrating the environmental qualification of electrical | |||
equipment important to safety located in a harsh environment. In , | |||
conformance with 10 CFR 50.49, electrical equipment for Hope Creek may be | |||
qualified according to the criteria specified in Category II of NUREG-0588. | |||
To document the degree to which the environmental program complies with | |||
the NRC environmental qualification requirements and criteria, the licensee | |||
provided equipment qualification information in letters dated June ?S, | |||
July 29 and 31, August 15, and December 5,1985; and, January 7, | |||
February 25, and March 26 and 31, 1986 to supplement the information in | |||
FSAR Section 3.11. | |||
In letters dated February 25, March 26 and 31,1986, the licensee stated | |||
that all equipment within the scope of 10 CFR 50.49 was qualified except | |||
for 53 transmitters included in the harsh environment qualification | |||
program. These transmitters were replaced with qualified transmitters | |||
before initial criticality. | |||
On July 15-18, 1985, the NRC staff with assistance from contract personnel | |||
conducted an audit of qualification documentation and equipment installed | |||
in the plant. | |||
On the basis of the results of the above review, the NRC staf f concluded | |||
that the licensee's program was acceptable for plant startup. | |||
4.0 E0 Program | |||
The Hope Creek EQ program was begun by Bechtel Power Carporation and has | |||
since been transferred to the Engineering and Construction Department of | |||
PSE&G. The EQ responsibility lies with the Controls and Electrical | |||
Division under the guidance of a Principal Engineer. | |||
' | |||
.. | |||
* | |||
., | |||
. | |||
5 | |||
Nuclear Procedure Number VPN-EDP-04 describes the primary requirements and | |||
responsibilities for the establishment and implementation of the Nuclear | |||
' | |||
Departmental Environmental Qualification (EQ) Program. The General | |||
Manager, Engineering and Plant Betterment, has overall responsibility for | |||
policy relating to the EQ program and to provide engineering support | |||
for- equipment qualification activities. The Assistant General Manager, | |||
Project Engineering provides direction for maintenance of EQ equipment, | |||
performs evaluations and analyses, and establishes engineering methods | |||
relating to equipment qualification. The basic functions involved in the | |||
EQ program include: a) identification of equipment subject to 10 CFR | |||
50.49 requirements; b) verifying and documenting qualification of the | |||
identified EQ equipment; and, c) ensuring that equipment qualification | |||
guidelines have been provided and are followed to maintain the | |||
qualification of EQ identified equipment. | |||
The approach taken by the licensee takes into consideration the complexities | |||
of the system interaction and the resulting affects on associated equip- | |||
ment. The Systems Analysis Group (SAG) under the Assistant General | |||
Manager, Project Engineering is responsible for determining which | |||
equipment requires qualification.and provides the working interface | |||
between Engineering and Plant Betterment, Systems Engineers and respon- | |||
sible station departments in matters involving the EQ program. | |||
The inspector reviewed the foregoing program and associated documents | |||
to verify that the program is comprehensive, controlled and meets the | |||
intent of 10 CFR 50.49. | |||
Control documents established for maintaining and implementing the | |||
environmental qualification program include: 1) VPN-EDP-02 Design Change | |||
Control; 2) VPN-PLP-06, Nuclear Department Maintenance; 3) VPN-EDP-06, | |||
Engineering Support Activities; 4) VPN-MSP-07, Records Management; and, | |||
5) Hope Creek Generating Station Environmental Qualification Summary | |||
Report. | |||
Within the scope of the above review, no deficiencies were identified. | |||
5.0 EQ Master List | |||
10 CFR 50.49(d) requires that a licensee operating a nuclear power plant | |||
; prepare a list of electrical equipment important to safety with | |||
l supporting documentation on file. Licensee Procedure No. VPN-EOP-04 | |||
i | |||
defines the Environmental Qualification Master List in general terms and | |||
; assigns overall responsibility for development, maintaining and control | |||
' | |||
to the Systems Analysis Group (SAG). | |||
Types of equipment specifically subject to the EQ Master List include: | |||
< * Safety related electrical equipment located in a harsh environment | |||
that is required to mitigate the accident which caused the harsh | |||
, | |||
environment. | |||
l | |||
t | |||
l | |||
! | |||
- | |||
. | |||
. | |||
6 | |||
* | |||
Safety related electrical equipment located in a hirsh environment | |||
that is not required to operate, but whose misoperation could have a | |||
deleterious effect on the mitigation of the accident which caused | |||
the harsh environment. | |||
* Safety related electrical equipment, although not renuired to | |||
mitigate the accident, whose malfunction could misicad the operator | |||
and result in inappropriate actions. | |||
* | |||
Post-accident monitoring equipment used tc assess accident severity | |||
and plant conditions during and after the accident. | |||
* Safety related electrical equipment located in a harsh environment | |||
which is required to operate in order to implement an Emergency | |||
Operating Procedures. | |||
Hope Creek has established a comprehensive, systematic program for | |||
identifying electrical equipment required to be environmentally qualified. | |||
Reviews /walkdowns have been conducted on a room-by-room basis. Components | |||
whose failure would prevent attainment of the safety function objectives | |||
were identified and placed on the Master List. Component classification | |||
was based on the FSAR, P&ID's, System Descriptions, Logic / Loop Drawings | |||
and Electrical Diagrams. | |||
As a validation check of the Master List, the NRC inspector selected | |||
several items of electrical equipment required to be used with the emer- | |||
gency operating procedures for a loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) and | |||
verified that they were all on the Master List or they were exempt for | |||
valid reasons. Based on the above review, no deficiencies were identified. | |||
6.0 EQ Procurement Program / Spare Parts and Replacement Control | |||
VPN-PRP-01, Revision 2, establishes requirements and responsibilities | |||
regarding the Nuclear Department procurement control process. This | |||
procedure applies to all activities by Nuclear Department personnel | |||
involved in the initiation of purchase requirements, classification of | |||
items, and control of the procurement process for obtaining EQ | |||
equipment. | |||
The NRC inspector reviewed the following procedures relating to the | |||
procurement srocess. | |||
* GM3-EMP-011 Revision 0, Item Classification Guidelines. | |||
* GMS-EMP-013 Revision 1, Nuclear Department Purchase Requisition | |||
Processing. | |||
l | |||
l | |||
l | |||
, | |||
. | |||
. | |||
7 | |||
* | |||
DE-AP-ZZ-0016(Q) Revision 0, Procurement Classification Guidelines | |||
(draft). | |||
* Site Engineering Instruction 3G-Revision 1 - Hope Creek spare parts | |||
quality determination. | |||
* | |||
SA-AP.ZZ-019(Q) - Revision 1 - Station Materials Procurement and | |||
Control Program. | |||
* QAP-4-1-Revision 6 - Receiving Inspection. | |||
* | |||
QAP-3-1-Revision 6 - QA Planning for Procurements. | |||
The inspector reviewed the procurement process for both station originated | |||
purchase orders (P0s) and for Engineering and Plant Betterment Department | |||
(E&PBD) Purchase Specifications. All approved Nuclear Department Purchase | |||
Requisitions (NDPRs) are transmitted to the Nuclear Department Procurement | |||
Core Group (NDPCG). This group is a matrix of Engineering, Quality | |||
Assurance, Purchasing and Spare Parts personnel. Engineering reviews | |||
NDPRs and Inventory Material Requisitions (IRMs), supplies item classifi- | |||
cation as required, assigns procurement specifications, approves changes | |||
to NDPR packages and processes design change requests when replacement | |||
parts are no longer commercially available. Quality Assurance reviews | |||
NDPRs and IRMs, assigns quality provisions as appropriate, conducts | |||
material receipt inspection and reviews and processes NDPRs and IRMs and | |||
issues P0s. Spare Parts personnel are responsible for updating and | |||
maintaining the managed maintenance information system (MMIS). | |||
Procurement of parts of environmentally qualified equipment are procured | |||
from the original supplier (OES) because of the OES's knowledge of the | |||
parts application and its technical and QA requirements. The utilization | |||
of non-0ES supplier requires the Program Analyses Group concurrence to | |||
assure compatibility with original qualification. | |||
The inspector verified implementation of the above listed procedures to | |||
assure the EQ requirements were satisfied by randomly selecting the below | |||
listed procurement packages. | |||
. | |||
IMR-0191730 Rockbestos Cable | |||
. | |||
P0-P1-242364 Rosemount Transmitter (two models) | |||
* P0-P2-190663 ASCO Solenoid Valve | |||
* PO-P2-184356 T&B Terminal | |||
* PO-P1-152753 ASCO Valve Kits | |||
* PO-P2-179029 NAMCO Limit Switch | |||
* PO-P1-136312 Peerless D.C. Motor | |||
+ PO-P2-179585 NAMC0 Limit Switch Gasket (Top Cover) | |||
. | |||
. | |||
8 | |||
The inspecter reviewed, where applicable, Equipment Evaluation Summary | |||
Sheets (EESS), Procedure Requisitions, Certificate of Conformances, | |||
Receiving Inspection Sheets, Quality Group Classification Checklists and | |||
Receiving Nonconformance Reports. | |||
Within the scope of this inspection, the inspector determined that the | |||
procurement program for procuring EQ spare and replacement parts was | |||
adequate and implemented in accordance with current procedures. | |||
7.0 EQ Related Maintenance and Modifications | |||
VPN-PLP-06, Revision 1, establishes responsibilities and requirements for | |||
maintenance activities within the Nuclear Department. This procedura | |||
applies to all maintenance activities performed by the Nuclear Department | |||
organization or outside organizations working in support of Nuclear | |||
Department operations. It applies to both preventive and corrective | |||
maintenance. | |||
The inspector reviewed the following implementing procedures relating to | |||
the maintenance program. | |||
* | |||
MD-AP.ZZ-009(Q) - REV 6 - Control of Station Maintenance. | |||
* | |||
SA-AP.ZZ-009(Q) - REV 12 - Control of Station Maintenance. | |||
* | |||
MO-AP.ZZ-010(Q) - REV 1 - Preventive Maintenance. | |||
* | |||
SA-AP.ZZ-010(Q) - REV 7 - Station Preventive Maintenance program. | |||
* GM9-QAP1-1 - REV 6 - PS&G Nuclear Qaulity Assurance Organization. | |||
* GM9-QAP-5-4 - REV 1 - Completed Work Package /Non-EQ Listed Work | |||
Order Review. | |||
* Site Engineering Instruction (SEI) 2.6-Preparation and distribution | |||
of EQMIS. | |||
Each EQ file has an EQ Maintenance and Surveillance Information Sheet | |||
(EQMIS) which outlines required maintenance activities including equip- | |||
ment and parts replacement frequency based on EQ test reports. vendor | |||
technical manuals and aging calculations. The overall EQ Preventative | |||
Maintenance Program invo!"es periodic surveillance and replacement of | |||
qualified electrical equipment. The testing, inspection, and replacement | |||
cycles for equipment or parts are conducted in accordance with the | |||
applicable procedures under the cognizance of the maintenance | |||
supervisor. | |||
EQ related corrective and preventative maintenance are performed through | |||
Maintenance Work Requests. The Managed Maintenance Information System | |||
(MMIS) is an integrated information processing system designed to create, | |||
update status and archive work orders and information related to completion | |||
of Work Orders. Preventative maintenance is set up by recurring tasks | |||
which ;s identified in the MMIS and which generate a Work Order for each | |||
task as it comes due. | |||
. _ __ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ | |||
g' | |||
* ~ ' | |||
, ,; m | |||
- | |||
9 | |||
, | |||
! | |||
The inspector randomly selected six EQMIS sheets for review from EQ | |||
~ | |||
Binders, as follows:- ' | |||
* | |||
1-SB-PS-N005A - Barksdale Pressure Switches | |||
* 1-AV-215 ~ Blower Motor Rockwell/ Reliance i | |||
* --l-EA-SV-2237 - Valcor Solenoid Valve | |||
* | |||
1-BB-SV-4310 - Valcor Solenoid Valve energized) | |||
* i-BB-SV-4311 - Valcor Solenoid Valve energized) : | |||
' | |||
* 1-FC-LSH-NC10 - Magnetrol. Level ~ Switch | |||
; | |||
The inspector reviewed, as applicable; Work Orders, Station Deficieticy , | |||
Reports,' Maintenance Procedures, Calibration Check / Data Sheets, t | |||
Signatures of applicable mechanics., Quality Assurance / Quality Control i | |||
Representatives and Maintenance Supervisor to verify implementation of ' | |||
the above listed procedures. | |||
Two Procedures were reviewed relating to-site and operaticr.a1 design , | |||
change control. Site Engineering Instructions 4.2 Revision-2, and ; | |||
GM8-EMP-009 Revision 2, Operational Design Change Control. Both f | |||
procedures establish a uniform method of controlling design changes , | |||
relating to methodology'of initiation, preparation, review and approval - | |||
of modification and maintenance work packages. The changes and revisions , | |||
to Design Change Packages undergo the same review and approval process as , | |||
the originals. . | |||
' | |||
; | |||
To assure that EQ requirements are satisfied, and verify implementation | |||
of the above procedures, the inspector reviewed two design . change | |||
packages, one relating to the replacement of the Tobar transmitter with a ; | |||
, qualified Rosemount transmitter and the other pertaining to the - | |||
, | |||
replacement of the Peerless D.C. Motor in a Limitorque Motor Operated | |||
4 | |||
Valve. | |||
~ | |||
Within the scope of this inspection, no deficiencies were identified. | |||
, | |||
8.0 EQ Personnel Training [ | |||
_ | |||
Procedure No. GMS-EMP-022 revision 1; Paragraph 9.2 states, that: "Station l | |||
personnel will be introduced and indoctrinated to the Environmental : | |||
, Qualification Program by means of video presentation by the NTC. These : | |||
i films will become a standard portion of the General Employee Training - | |||
(GET). One film will provide all employees with a general overview and , | |||
description of EQ, and the others will be more specific for those | |||
. | |||
employees wh will have a definitive function within the program." | |||
Course material for the EQ Training program include: 1) EQ Equipment - . | |||
Introduction to EQ equipment. !.essen Plan No. 607-153.20-801-04 (2 hr.); i | |||
* | |||
and, 2) EQ Equipment - Lesson Plan No. 607HC-000.00-850-00 (4 hr.). | |||
There was no evidence of any training being given during 1986. An > | |||
> internal memo (NTC-86-21.15) from the Manager, Nuclear Training indicates | |||
i that the Environmental Qualification (EQ) training program which was to " | |||
begin on December 1, 1986 had been indefinitely postponed. | |||
l , | |||
t | |||
! | |||
t | |||
, - _ _ -. - - - _ - _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ | |||
_ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . . . _ . . . , . . _ _ . _ _ _ - . . _ - | |||
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ | |||
.' | |||
' | |||
. | |||
, | |||
10 | |||
The licensee indicated that EQ personnel become familiar with EQ through | |||
the use of internal procedures which implement and administrate the EQ | |||
program as part of their normal indoctrination. In addition, EQ | |||
personnel are hired or contracted based on their education and level of | |||
experience in the EQ area. -Personnel records examined by the NRC | |||
inspector confirm experience and knowledge in the area of EQ. | |||
The EQ training program was re-established in late 1987. Training | |||
sessions were given to I&C and Maintenance personnel on December 14-18, | |||
1987 and January 18-25, 1988. | |||
Within the scope of this review, no deficiencies were identified. | |||
9.0 EQ Related NRC Information Notices and Bulletins | |||
PSE&G has established a Response Coordination Team (RCT) to evaluate and | |||
record the applicability and impact of NRC Bulletins, Circulars, | |||
Information Notices and Industry Experiences. The Response Coordination | |||
Team consists of representatives from Nuclear Reliability and Regulation, | |||
Engineering, Quality Assurance and Hope Creek Operations Personnel. The | |||
RCT chairman receives, reviews and assigns responsibility for | |||
investigation of various NRC Bulletins, Circulars, Information Notices and | |||
Industry Experience Documents. A detail review and analysis to determine | |||
potential impact is done by the responsible originator. This review | |||
process is designed to analyze, identify and address the potential impact | |||
of these documents as they partain to Hope Creek as well as the EQ | |||
program. Actions committed to in response and reports are tracked by the | |||
RCT, | |||
Licansee administrative controls for satisfying the requirements of | |||
Bulletins, Circulars, Information Notices and Industry Experience is | |||
A <ined in Procedure No. GMB-EMP-008 entitled "NRC IE Bulletins, IE | |||
, | |||
Int e matie Notices and INPO Documents." This procedure defines the | |||
progr m ,ed by the Engineering and Plant Betterment Department to | |||
coordinate the review and action taken when responding to the NRC, | |||
Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INP0), Significant Event Reports | |||
(SER), and Operations and Maintenance Reminders (0 & MRs). | |||
To assure licensee implementa:. ion of established controls, the NRC | |||
inspector examined licensee rasponse and actions taken for Information | |||
Notice Nos. IN 85-39, IN 85-40, IN 85-52, IN 84-44, IN 84-57 and IN ~ | |||
83-72. | |||
Within the scope of this inspection, no deficiencies were identified. | |||
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ | |||
* | |||
. | |||
. | |||
11 | |||
10.0 Information Notice No. 86-53 (Raychem Heat Shrink Tubing) | |||
In response to Information Notice No. 86-53, the licensee reviewed the | |||
Hope Creek Unit 1 Raychem Heat Shrink tubing application documents. The | |||
results of the licensee recommendation to inspect Raychem Heat Shrink | |||
Splices, in accordance with the guidelines of the Information Notice 86-53 ' | |||
are documented in licensee Report Nos. RC-87-015 and RC-87-103, and | |||
Station QA Surveillance Report No. 87-254. | |||
The random sampling performed by the licensee outside the drywell and the | |||
inspection performed by the NRC during this inspection indicates that the | |||
Raychem 'nstallation conforms with manufacturer's recommended practices | |||
except in the a ea of cable bend radius, as defined in Section 3.4.6 of | |||
Raychem Application Guide No. H 51211 (revised August 1983). The | |||
specific bend radius requirement was not part of Raychem's splice | |||
instructions prior to August 1983. The licensee's review of Bechtel | |||
Drawing No. E-1000-0 indicate that a few splices may have been installed | |||
in a harsh environment with a two times cable bend radius instead of the | |||
recommended five times cable bend radius specified by Raychem. To | |||
resolve the issue, the licensee performed a safety evaluation on April | |||
14, 1987 using Wyle NEQ test Report No. 17859-028 dated March 11, 1987 | |||
which had qualified severely bent Raychem splice installed at Commonwealth | |||
Edison Nuclear Facilities. The licensee's review indicated that the Hope | |||
Creek environmental profile falls within the tested profile and that the | |||
test results are applicable to Hope Creek. | |||
The inspector verified that the Hope Creek cable bend radius deficiencies | |||
were qualified by the Wyle Report. | |||
The inspection of Raychem Heat Shrink Splices inside Containment is | |||
scheduled for the 1988 outage. | |||
Within the scope of this review, no deficiencies were identified. | |||
~ | |||
11.0 Evaluation of Information Notice 86-03 (Limitorque Motor ' | |||
. | |||
Operator Valve Wiring) | |||
The inspector reviewed the actions of the licensee relating to Limitorque | |||
motor operator valve wiring. Several inspections were made by the | |||
licensee during the construction phase of Hope Creek. Limitorque wiring | |||
was first inspected by the licensee to Bechtel General Technical Specifi- | |||
, | |||
cation during the 1984-1985 time frame. Another inspection series was | |||
i | |||
performed in 1985-1986 using Bechtel Specific Work Plant / Procedure | |||
SWP/P-E-18 "Appendix A" which specified the criteria used by Bechtel for | |||
inspection of Limitorque op3rators. Limitorque operators were also | |||
inspected during the regrease effort (October 1985 to March 1986), and | |||
during fine tuning of the operators (1985-1986). A sample of five operators | |||
i | |||
* | |||
. | |||
. | |||
12 | |||
was inspected for wiring in response to IN 86-03. The inspector reviewed | |||
inspection records relating to the inspections and determined that only | |||
Rockbestos SIS or Raychem flametrol wiring was used. The NRC inspection | |||
team reviewed three Limitorque MOVs during the walkdown and determined | |||
that qualified wiring (Rockbestos/Raychem) was installed. It was deter- | |||
mined by the inspector that the licensee demonstrated adequate review and | |||
actions prior to the issuance of IN-86-03 and after the notice was issued. | |||
12.0 Equipment / Component Environmental Qualification File | |||
The licensee's EQ files were examined to verify the nualified status of | |||
the safety-related class IE equipment within the score of 10 CFR 50.49. | |||
The review consisted of comparing plant service conditions with | |||
qualification test conditions and verification of f.he basis for these | |||
conditions. The inspectors selectively reviewed areas such as required | |||
operating time compared to the duration of time the equipment has been | |||
demonstrated to be qualified; similarity of tested equipment to that | |||
installed in the plant (e.g., insulation class, component materials, | |||
tested configuration versus installed configuration and documentation for | |||
both); evaluation of adequacy of test conditions; aging calculations for | |||
qualified life and replacement interval determination; effects of decreases | |||
in insulation resistance on equipment performance; adequacy of demonstrated | |||
~ | |||
equipment accuracy; evaluation of anomalies; and applicability of EQ | |||
problems reported in IE Information Notices / Bulletins and their | |||
resolutions. | |||
The inspectors sampled 13 EQ files. The EQ files selected, covered such | |||
areas as electrical cables, limitorque motor operated valves, pumps, cable | |||
splices, radiation detectors and pressure / level transmitters. These files | |||
contain documentation utilized by the licensee to provide a basis for | |||
demonstrating that the equipment type is qualified, the equipment type | |||
being a specific component or equipment, designated by the manufacturer | |||
and model number, which is representative of all identical | |||
equipment / components in a plant area exposed to the same or less severe | |||
environmental service conditions. | |||
In reviewing the files, the inspector identified EQ file Nos. J-601, J-373 | |||
and E-171 that contained deletions and whiteout changes to the original | |||
text which had not been initialed or dated. The licensee was informed | |||
that this item was in violation of Section 8.2.1 of procedure No. | |||
VPN-NSD-07 which states that: "the use of whiteout and/or obliteration is | |||
not permitted on Quality Assurance Records. Changes shall be made by a | |||
single line drawn through the item with new information written in, | |||
initialed and dated." This item is a violation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, | |||
Criterion V which states, in part, that: "Activities affecting quality | |||
shall be accomplished in accordance with instructions, procedures...." | |||
(354/88-03-01) | |||
. -. . - . - _ _ _ _ __ . .. | |||
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _. _ __ | |||
. | |||
. . | |||
13 | |||
During the file review, the team concluded that the EQ files were | |||
difficult to audit. The EQ files are listed by purchase order number and | |||
contain all the qualifying documents / reports applicable to each item of | |||
equipment / component procured under that purchase order number. This makes | |||
the file difficult to audit for equipment qualification in that the | |||
individuals performing the audit must search out the applicable document | |||
and determine its applicability. The EQ file index references each | |||
section within the file generically, such as, reports, calculations, | |||
correspondence, i.e. The licensee acknowledged the NRC concern and stated | |||
that this was also a finding in their own audit (number NM-87-09) of the | |||
EQ program, and is being considered as part of the programmatic develop- | |||
ment of EQ within the new Engineering and Plant Betterment organization. , | |||
The licensee indicated that the EQ files will be restructured into a | |||
generic equipment based system. The licensee has committed to provide a | |||
plan and implementation schedule by April 15, 1988 to the NRC as to when | |||
this task will be completed. | |||
This item is unresolved pending NRC receipt and review of licenses's | |||
completion schedule and action taken to simplify and improve EQ file | |||
auditability (88-03-02). | |||
13.0 Specific File Deficiencies | |||
13.1 EQ File No. P301/p302 (Limitorque Motor Operated Valves) | |||
The inspector reviewed the EQ file package for equipment / components | |||
procured against purchase order Nos. P-301 and P-302. Thes3 EQ | |||
files contained documentation used to support qualification of | |||
Limitorque Motor Operated Valves (MOVs). During the file review, | |||
two MOVs were identified in containment which used the Marathon 1600 | |||
Terminal Block. The inspector questioned the adequacy of the | |||
Limitorque Test Report No. B-0119 to qualify the Marathon 1600 | |||
' | |||
Terminal Block for in containment use. | |||
The B-0119 report indicates the test configuration included a group | |||
of terminal blocks in an operator (MOV) compartment enclosure. A | |||
Marathon 300 Terminal Block and several Marathon 1600 Terminal | |||
Blocks were used in the test group. Only the Marathon 300 Test | |||
Block was energized during the LOCA testing. The Manufacturer of | |||
Limitorque had concluded in their review and acceptance criteria | |||
that the Marathon 300 Terminal Block was representative of other | |||
Terminal Blocks in the test group. A similarity analysis was not on | |||
file for comparison of the Marathon 300 Terminal Block and the other | |||
test Blocks. However, a letter, dated January 29, 1988 was obtained | |||
f rom Marathon Specialty Products company confirming similarity of | |||
the Marathon 300 Terminal Block and the Marathon 1600 Terminal | |||
Block. | |||
. | |||
- | |||
. | |||
, | |||
14 ; | |||
< | |||
During the course of the inspection the licensee was able tc provide | |||
a copy of a proprietary test report which qualifies the Marathon | |||
1600 Terminal Block for limited use in containment. The test was | |||
performed by Wyle Laboratories to satisfy the intent of IEEE-323-1974. | |||
The Terminal Blocks were subjected to the environmental test program | |||
specified in Wyle Test Procedure No. 6110-06-1 and described in test | |||
Report No. 6110-06-2. | |||
The LOCA test profile envelopes the Hope Creek profile. The | |||
inspector concluded that the Marathon 1600 Terminal Blocks were | |||
qualified to function in the LOCA environment for the time period | |||
specified. | |||
14.0 Plant Physical Inspection of Electrical Equipmpnt | |||
The plant physical inspection consisted of an examination of safety-related | |||
electrical equipment selected from the EQ Master List. Since the plant | |||
was operational, the equipment selected was located and installed in | |||
areas outside the containment. The equipment selected included: | |||
Limitorque Motor Operated Valves, Pressure / Level Transmitters, Solenoid | |||
valves, and electrical cable splices. | |||
The inspector examined characteristics such as mounting configuration, | |||
orientation, connection interfaces, moisture seals, model/ type, bend | |||
radius, accessibility, cleanliness and physical condition. | |||
Electrical cable splices were examined in four junction boxes located on | |||
elevation 54'-0 and /7'-0. The inspector observed that all four junction | |||
boxes (one safety-related 1F-DLV-F025) contaired dirt and debris. Some of | |||
the debris appeared to be left over from construction. The licensee was | |||
not able to explain the presence of the dirt / debris stating that each | |||
system is inspected prior to turn over of the system by construction | |||
personnel. | |||
This item is unresolved pending NRC review of licensee review and | |||
evaluation of the extent of the problem (354/88-03-03). | |||
No other deficiencies were identified. | |||
15.0 Unresolved Items | |||
Unresolved items are matters which require more information in order to | |||
ascertain whether they are acceptable items or violations. Unresolved | |||
item (s) are discussed in Details, Paragraphs 12 and 14. | |||
' | |||
.. | |||
' | |||
. . | |||
, | |||
15 | |||
16.0 Exit Meeting | |||
The inspector met with licensee corporate and site personnel (denoted in | |||
Details, paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on | |||
January 29, 1988 at the plant site. The inspectors summarized the scope | |||
of the inspection and the inspection findings at that time. | |||
At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the | |||
licensee. | |||
}} |
Latest revision as of 04:00, 15 November 2020
ML20151W171 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Hope Creek |
Issue date: | 04/09/1988 |
From: | Anderson C, Paolino R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
To: | |
Shared Package | |
ML20151W163 | List: |
References | |
50-354-88-03, 50-354-88-3, IEIN-83-72, IEIN-84-44, IEIN-84-57, IEIN-85-039, IEIN-85-040, IEIN-85-052, IEIN-85-39, IEIN-85-40, IEIN-85-52, IEIN-86-003, IEIN-86-053, IEIN-86-3, IEIN-86-53, NUDOCS 8805030316 | |
Download: ML20151W171 (15) | |
See also: IR 05000354/1988003
Text
-
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 50-354/88-03
Docket No. 50-354
License No. NPF-57 Priority - Category C
Licensee: Public Service Electric & Gas Company
P.O. Box 236
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038
Facility Name: Hope Creek Unit 1 Nuclear Power Plant
Inspection At: Hope Creek Unit 1
Inspection Conducted: January 26-29, 1988
Inspectors: //h U/-2 /
date
'
R.J~. f aolino, Senior Reactor Engineer PSS/EB
Other Participants and Contributors to the report include:
D. Brousseau, Consultant - Sandia National Laboratory
R. Carpenter, Consultant - Idaho National Engineering Laboratory
A. Finkel, Senior Reactor Engineer - OPS /RI
R. Moist, Equipment Qualification and Test Engineer - NRR/HQ
R. Vanderbeek, Consultant - Idaho National Engineering Laboratory
Approved by: . . /
C.J. AKderson, Chief, Plant Systems date
Section - EB/0RS
Inspection Summary: Inspection on January 26-29, 1988 (Inspection Report
Number 50-354/88-03)
Areas Inspected: Announced inspection to: 1) review licensee's Environmental
Qualification Program and verify its implementation in accordance with
10 CFR 50.49 requirements for maintaining the qualification status of
electrical equipment in a harsh environment; 2) review licensee's response
and resolutions to equipment concerns identified in the NRC Safety Evaluation
Report; and, 3) verification of installed configuration for EQ electricat
equipment selected from EQ Master List.
'805030316
8 s80427
PDR ADOCK 05000354
g DCD
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
2
Results: The licensee's EQ program was examined in detail and found to be in
compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.49 except for certain
deficiencies identified as follows:
a) EQ files (J-313, J-601 and E-171) were identified with whiteout and changes
that were not initialed or dated by person making the changes as required
by procedure No. VPN-NSP-07, section 8.2.1. This item is a violation
of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V.
b) Files are identified by purchase order numbers, making them dif ficult to
audit since the EQ files contain unrelated items purchased on that
particular purchase order. Qualification support data is lumped into the
one file and are not segregated according to application. This item is
unresolved pending NRC review of licensee corrective action.
c) Dirt and debris was identified in junction boxes. This item is
unresolved, pending NRC review of licensee determination of extent of
problems.
.
._ _-____ ___ ___ _
. -
_
q
q; ,
.
s
'
,
DETAILS
1.0. Persons Contacted
,
,
1^.1 Public Service Electric & Gas Company
E. Addill, Electrical Planner
R. Beard, Procurement Engineering S'upervisor .:
P. Benini, Principal Engineer
P. Blum,~ Observer ,,
- J.T. Boettger, Assistant Vice President '
- R.H. Burricelli, General Manager Engineering and Plant Betterment
- R. Donges, Licensing Engineer
- J. Duffy, Senior Engineer
R. Fein, Procurement Engineer
J. Fisher, Station QA.-Supervisor
- S.F. Hilditch, Jr; Senior-Staff QA Enginee'r
- C.W. Lambert, Nuclear Engineering Sciences Manager
- S. La_Bruna, General Manager Hope Creek Station i
M. La Vecchia, Principal QA Engineer
R. Leach, Electrical Planner
- L.K. Miller, Manager Nuclear Engineering Services
- W.E. Mokuid, Senior Maintenance Supervisor '
- I. Nag, Senior Staff Engineer
B.A. Preston, Manager Licensing and Reliability
L.A. Reiter, General Manager Licensing and Reliability ,
M. Rosensweig, Manager QA Engineering and Procurement '
- J. Rucki, I&C Systems Engineer - Electrical ,
, R.J. Smith, EQ Engineer
,* +
M. Sullivan, I&C Group Leader
J. Thompson, Systems Engineer ;
- F.Y. Thomson, Principal Engineer
- D.J. Vito, Senior Licensing Engineer ;
M. Woloski, Senior Staff Engineer [
>
>
1.2 Consultants [
j * K.L. Bar, Asta Engineering
<
- J. Bruce, Asta Engineering
j' * D.P. Ganguly, Asta Engineering
- J. Lariviere, Proto-Power Corporation
- ,
' U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
1.3 ;
- R.W. Borchardt, Senior Resident Inspector
- C.J. Anderson, Chief, Plant System Section - EB/DRS
,
' * Denotes personnel present at exit meeting of January 29, 1988.
4
b
i
o j
_ _ _ _ _
.
.
4
2.0 Purpose
The purpose of this inspection was: 1) to review the licensee's
implementation of a program to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.49 for
the Hope Creek Unit 1 facility; 2) to review licensee's response to NRC's
Safety Evaluation; and, 3) verify component installed configuration of
specific EQ equipment selected from the Master List.
3.0 Background
In February 1980, the NRC asked near-term operating license (0L) applicants
to review and evaluate the environmental qualification of each item of
safety-related electrical equipment and to identify the degree to which
their qualification programs were in compliance with the staff positions
discussed in NUREG-0588.
A final rule on environmental qualification of electrical equipment
important to safety for Nuclear Power Plants became effective on
February 22, 1983. This rule, 10 CFR 50.49, specifies the requirements
to be met for demonstrating the environmental qualification of electrical
equipment important to safety located in a harsh environment. In ,
conformance with 10 CFR 50.49, electrical equipment for Hope Creek may be
qualified according to the criteria specified in Category II of NUREG-0588.
To document the degree to which the environmental program complies with
the NRC environmental qualification requirements and criteria, the licensee
provided equipment qualification information in letters dated June ?S,
July 29 and 31, August 15, and December 5,1985; and, January 7,
February 25, and March 26 and 31, 1986 to supplement the information in
FSAR Section 3.11.
In letters dated February 25, March 26 and 31,1986, the licensee stated
that all equipment within the scope of 10 CFR 50.49 was qualified except
for 53 transmitters included in the harsh environment qualification
program. These transmitters were replaced with qualified transmitters
before initial criticality.
On July 15-18, 1985, the NRC staff with assistance from contract personnel
conducted an audit of qualification documentation and equipment installed
in the plant.
On the basis of the results of the above review, the NRC staf f concluded
that the licensee's program was acceptable for plant startup.
4.0 E0 Program
The Hope Creek EQ program was begun by Bechtel Power Carporation and has
since been transferred to the Engineering and Construction Department of
PSE&G. The EQ responsibility lies with the Controls and Electrical
Division under the guidance of a Principal Engineer.
'
..
.,
.
5
Nuclear Procedure Number VPN-EDP-04 describes the primary requirements and
responsibilities for the establishment and implementation of the Nuclear
'
Departmental Environmental Qualification (EQ) Program. The General
Manager, Engineering and Plant Betterment, has overall responsibility for
policy relating to the EQ program and to provide engineering support
for- equipment qualification activities. The Assistant General Manager,
Project Engineering provides direction for maintenance of EQ equipment,
performs evaluations and analyses, and establishes engineering methods
relating to equipment qualification. The basic functions involved in the
EQ program include: a) identification of equipment subject to 10 CFR
50.49 requirements; b) verifying and documenting qualification of the
identified EQ equipment; and, c) ensuring that equipment qualification
guidelines have been provided and are followed to maintain the
qualification of EQ identified equipment.
The approach taken by the licensee takes into consideration the complexities
of the system interaction and the resulting affects on associated equip-
ment. The Systems Analysis Group (SAG) under the Assistant General
Manager, Project Engineering is responsible for determining which
equipment requires qualification.and provides the working interface
between Engineering and Plant Betterment, Systems Engineers and respon-
sible station departments in matters involving the EQ program.
The inspector reviewed the foregoing program and associated documents
to verify that the program is comprehensive, controlled and meets the
intent of 10 CFR 50.49.
Control documents established for maintaining and implementing the
environmental qualification program include: 1) VPN-EDP-02 Design Change
Control; 2) VPN-PLP-06, Nuclear Department Maintenance; 3) VPN-EDP-06,
Engineering Support Activities; 4) VPN-MSP-07, Records Management; and,
5) Hope Creek Generating Station Environmental Qualification Summary
Report.
Within the scope of the above review, no deficiencies were identified.
5.0 EQ Master List
10 CFR 50.49(d) requires that a licensee operating a nuclear power plant
- prepare a list of electrical equipment important to safety with
l supporting documentation on file. Licensee Procedure No. VPN-EOP-04
i
defines the Environmental Qualification Master List in general terms and
- assigns overall responsibility for development, maintaining and control
'
to the Systems Analysis Group (SAG).
Types of equipment specifically subject to the EQ Master List include:
< * Safety related electrical equipment located in a harsh environment
that is required to mitigate the accident which caused the harsh
,
environment.
l
t
l
!
-
.
.
6
Safety related electrical equipment located in a hirsh environment
that is not required to operate, but whose misoperation could have a
deleterious effect on the mitigation of the accident which caused
the harsh environment.
- Safety related electrical equipment, although not renuired to
mitigate the accident, whose malfunction could misicad the operator
and result in inappropriate actions.
Post-accident monitoring equipment used tc assess accident severity
and plant conditions during and after the accident.
- Safety related electrical equipment located in a harsh environment
which is required to operate in order to implement an Emergency
Operating Procedures.
Hope Creek has established a comprehensive, systematic program for
identifying electrical equipment required to be environmentally qualified.
Reviews /walkdowns have been conducted on a room-by-room basis. Components
whose failure would prevent attainment of the safety function objectives
were identified and placed on the Master List. Component classification
was based on the FSAR, P&ID's, System Descriptions, Logic / Loop Drawings
and Electrical Diagrams.
As a validation check of the Master List, the NRC inspector selected
several items of electrical equipment required to be used with the emer-
gency operating procedures for a loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) and
verified that they were all on the Master List or they were exempt for
valid reasons. Based on the above review, no deficiencies were identified.
6.0 EQ Procurement Program / Spare Parts and Replacement Control
VPN-PRP-01, Revision 2, establishes requirements and responsibilities
regarding the Nuclear Department procurement control process. This
procedure applies to all activities by Nuclear Department personnel
involved in the initiation of purchase requirements, classification of
items, and control of the procurement process for obtaining EQ
equipment.
The NRC inspector reviewed the following procedures relating to the
procurement srocess.
- GM3-EMP-011 Revision 0, Item Classification Guidelines.
- GMS-EMP-013 Revision 1, Nuclear Department Purchase Requisition
Processing.
l
l
l
,
.
.
7
DE-AP-ZZ-0016(Q) Revision 0, Procurement Classification Guidelines
(draft).
- Site Engineering Instruction 3G-Revision 1 - Hope Creek spare parts
quality determination.
SA-AP.ZZ-019(Q) - Revision 1 - Station Materials Procurement and
Control Program.
- QAP-4-1-Revision 6 - Receiving Inspection.
QAP-3-1-Revision 6 - QA Planning for Procurements.
The inspector reviewed the procurement process for both station originated
purchase orders (P0s) and for Engineering and Plant Betterment Department
(E&PBD) Purchase Specifications. All approved Nuclear Department Purchase
Requisitions (NDPRs) are transmitted to the Nuclear Department Procurement
Core Group (NDPCG). This group is a matrix of Engineering, Quality
Assurance, Purchasing and Spare Parts personnel. Engineering reviews
NDPRs and Inventory Material Requisitions (IRMs), supplies item classifi-
cation as required, assigns procurement specifications, approves changes
to NDPR packages and processes design change requests when replacement
parts are no longer commercially available. Quality Assurance reviews
NDPRs and IRMs, assigns quality provisions as appropriate, conducts
material receipt inspection and reviews and processes NDPRs and IRMs and
issues P0s. Spare Parts personnel are responsible for updating and
maintaining the managed maintenance information system (MMIS).
Procurement of parts of environmentally qualified equipment are procured
from the original supplier (OES) because of the OES's knowledge of the
parts application and its technical and QA requirements. The utilization
of non-0ES supplier requires the Program Analyses Group concurrence to
assure compatibility with original qualification.
The inspector verified implementation of the above listed procedures to
assure the EQ requirements were satisfied by randomly selecting the below
listed procurement packages.
.
IMR-0191730 Rockbestos Cable
.
P0-P1-242364 Rosemount Transmitter (two models)
- P0-P2-190663 ASCO Solenoid Valve
- PO-P2-184356 T&B Terminal
- PO-P1-152753 ASCO Valve Kits
- PO-P2-179029 NAMCO Limit Switch
- PO-P1-136312 Peerless D.C. Motor
+ PO-P2-179585 NAMC0 Limit Switch Gasket (Top Cover)
.
.
8
The inspecter reviewed, where applicable, Equipment Evaluation Summary
Sheets (EESS), Procedure Requisitions, Certificate of Conformances,
Receiving Inspection Sheets, Quality Group Classification Checklists and
Receiving Nonconformance Reports.
Within the scope of this inspection, the inspector determined that the
procurement program for procuring EQ spare and replacement parts was
adequate and implemented in accordance with current procedures.
7.0 EQ Related Maintenance and Modifications
VPN-PLP-06, Revision 1, establishes responsibilities and requirements for
maintenance activities within the Nuclear Department. This procedura
applies to all maintenance activities performed by the Nuclear Department
organization or outside organizations working in support of Nuclear
Department operations. It applies to both preventive and corrective
maintenance.
The inspector reviewed the following implementing procedures relating to
the maintenance program.
MD-AP.ZZ-009(Q) - REV 6 - Control of Station Maintenance.
SA-AP.ZZ-009(Q) - REV 12 - Control of Station Maintenance.
MO-AP.ZZ-010(Q) - REV 1 - Preventive Maintenance.
SA-AP.ZZ-010(Q) - REV 7 - Station Preventive Maintenance program.
- GM9-QAP1-1 - REV 6 - PS&G Nuclear Qaulity Assurance Organization.
- GM9-QAP-5-4 - REV 1 - Completed Work Package /Non-EQ Listed Work
Order Review.
- Site Engineering Instruction (SEI) 2.6-Preparation and distribution
of EQMIS.
Each EQ file has an EQ Maintenance and Surveillance Information Sheet
(EQMIS) which outlines required maintenance activities including equip-
ment and parts replacement frequency based on EQ test reports. vendor
technical manuals and aging calculations. The overall EQ Preventative
Maintenance Program invo!"es periodic surveillance and replacement of
qualified electrical equipment. The testing, inspection, and replacement
cycles for equipment or parts are conducted in accordance with the
applicable procedures under the cognizance of the maintenance
supervisor.
EQ related corrective and preventative maintenance are performed through
Maintenance Work Requests. The Managed Maintenance Information System
(MMIS) is an integrated information processing system designed to create,
update status and archive work orders and information related to completion
of Work Orders. Preventative maintenance is set up by recurring tasks
which ;s identified in the MMIS and which generate a Work Order for each
task as it comes due.
. _ __ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
g'
- ~ '
, ,; m
-
9
,
!
The inspector randomly selected six EQMIS sheets for review from EQ
~
Binders, as follows:- '
1-SB-PS-N005A - Barksdale Pressure Switches
- 1-AV-215 ~ Blower Motor Rockwell/ Reliance i
- --l-EA-SV-2237 - Valcor Solenoid Valve
1-BB-SV-4310 - Valcor Solenoid Valve energized)
- i-BB-SV-4311 - Valcor Solenoid Valve energized) :
'
- 1-FC-LSH-NC10 - Magnetrol. Level ~ Switch
The inspector reviewed, as applicable; Work Orders, Station Deficieticy ,
Reports,' Maintenance Procedures, Calibration Check / Data Sheets, t
Signatures of applicable mechanics., Quality Assurance / Quality Control i
Representatives and Maintenance Supervisor to verify implementation of '
the above listed procedures.
Two Procedures were reviewed relating to-site and operaticr.a1 design ,
change control. Site Engineering Instructions 4.2 Revision-2, and ;
GM8-EMP-009 Revision 2, Operational Design Change Control. Both f
procedures establish a uniform method of controlling design changes ,
relating to methodology'of initiation, preparation, review and approval -
of modification and maintenance work packages. The changes and revisions ,
to Design Change Packages undergo the same review and approval process as ,
the originals. .
'
To assure that EQ requirements are satisfied, and verify implementation
of the above procedures, the inspector reviewed two design . change
packages, one relating to the replacement of the Tobar transmitter with a ;
, qualified Rosemount transmitter and the other pertaining to the -
,
replacement of the Peerless D.C. Motor in a Limitorque Motor Operated
4
Valve.
~
Within the scope of this inspection, no deficiencies were identified.
,
8.0 EQ Personnel Training [
_
Procedure No. GMS-EMP-022 revision 1; Paragraph 9.2 states, that: "Station l
personnel will be introduced and indoctrinated to the Environmental :
, Qualification Program by means of video presentation by the NTC. These :
i films will become a standard portion of the General Employee Training -
(GET). One film will provide all employees with a general overview and ,
description of EQ, and the others will be more specific for those
.
employees wh will have a definitive function within the program."
Course material for the EQ Training program include: 1) EQ Equipment - .
Introduction to EQ equipment. !.essen Plan No. 607-153.20-801-04 (2 hr.); i
and, 2) EQ Equipment - Lesson Plan No. 607HC-000.00-850-00 (4 hr.).
There was no evidence of any training being given during 1986. An >
> internal memo (NTC-86-21.15) from the Manager, Nuclear Training indicates
i that the Environmental Qualification (EQ) training program which was to "
begin on December 1, 1986 had been indefinitely postponed.
l ,
t
!
t
, - _ _ -. - - - _ - _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _
_ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . . . _ . . . , . . _ _ . _ _ _ - . . _ -
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.'
'
.
,
10
The licensee indicated that EQ personnel become familiar with EQ through
the use of internal procedures which implement and administrate the EQ
program as part of their normal indoctrination. In addition, EQ
personnel are hired or contracted based on their education and level of
experience in the EQ area. -Personnel records examined by the NRC
inspector confirm experience and knowledge in the area of EQ.
The EQ training program was re-established in late 1987. Training
sessions were given to I&C and Maintenance personnel on December 14-18,
1987 and January 18-25, 1988.
Within the scope of this review, no deficiencies were identified.
9.0 EQ Related NRC Information Notices and Bulletins
PSE&G has established a Response Coordination Team (RCT) to evaluate and
record the applicability and impact of NRC Bulletins, Circulars,
Information Notices and Industry Experiences. The Response Coordination
Team consists of representatives from Nuclear Reliability and Regulation,
Engineering, Quality Assurance and Hope Creek Operations Personnel. The
RCT chairman receives, reviews and assigns responsibility for
investigation of various NRC Bulletins, Circulars, Information Notices and
Industry Experience Documents. A detail review and analysis to determine
potential impact is done by the responsible originator. This review
process is designed to analyze, identify and address the potential impact
of these documents as they partain to Hope Creek as well as the EQ
program. Actions committed to in response and reports are tracked by the
RCT,
Licansee administrative controls for satisfying the requirements of
Bulletins, Circulars, Information Notices and Industry Experience is
A <ined in Procedure No. GMB-EMP-008 entitled "NRC IE Bulletins, IE
,
Int e matie Notices and INPO Documents." This procedure defines the
progr m ,ed by the Engineering and Plant Betterment Department to
coordinate the review and action taken when responding to the NRC,
Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INP0), Significant Event Reports
(SER), and Operations and Maintenance Reminders (0 & MRs).
To assure licensee implementa:. ion of established controls, the NRC
inspector examined licensee rasponse and actions taken for Information
Notice Nos. IN 85-39, IN 85-40, IN 85-52, IN 84-44, IN 84-57 and IN ~
83-72.
Within the scope of this inspection, no deficiencies were identified.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
11
10.0 Information Notice No. 86-53 (Raychem Heat Shrink Tubing)
In response to Information Notice No. 86-53, the licensee reviewed the
Hope Creek Unit 1 Raychem Heat Shrink tubing application documents. The
results of the licensee recommendation to inspect Raychem Heat Shrink
Splices, in accordance with the guidelines of the Information Notice 86-53 '
are documented in licensee Report Nos. RC-87-015 and RC-87-103, and
Station QA Surveillance Report No.87-254.
The random sampling performed by the licensee outside the drywell and the
inspection performed by the NRC during this inspection indicates that the
Raychem 'nstallation conforms with manufacturer's recommended practices
except in the a ea of cable bend radius, as defined in Section 3.4.6 of
Raychem Application Guide No. H 51211 (revised August 1983). The
specific bend radius requirement was not part of Raychem's splice
instructions prior to August 1983. The licensee's review of Bechtel
Drawing No. E-1000-0 indicate that a few splices may have been installed
in a harsh environment with a two times cable bend radius instead of the
recommended five times cable bend radius specified by Raychem. To
resolve the issue, the licensee performed a safety evaluation on April
14, 1987 using Wyle NEQ test Report No. 17859-028 dated March 11, 1987
which had qualified severely bent Raychem splice installed at Commonwealth
Edison Nuclear Facilities. The licensee's review indicated that the Hope
Creek environmental profile falls within the tested profile and that the
test results are applicable to Hope Creek.
The inspector verified that the Hope Creek cable bend radius deficiencies
were qualified by the Wyle Report.
The inspection of Raychem Heat Shrink Splices inside Containment is
scheduled for the 1988 outage.
Within the scope of this review, no deficiencies were identified.
~
11.0 Evaluation of Information Notice 86-03 (Limitorque Motor '
.
Operator Valve Wiring)
The inspector reviewed the actions of the licensee relating to Limitorque
motor operator valve wiring. Several inspections were made by the
licensee during the construction phase of Hope Creek. Limitorque wiring
was first inspected by the licensee to Bechtel General Technical Specifi-
,
cation during the 1984-1985 time frame. Another inspection series was
i
performed in 1985-1986 using Bechtel Specific Work Plant / Procedure
SWP/P-E-18 "Appendix A" which specified the criteria used by Bechtel for
inspection of Limitorque op3rators. Limitorque operators were also
inspected during the regrease effort (October 1985 to March 1986), and
during fine tuning of the operators (1985-1986). A sample of five operators
i
.
.
12
was inspected for wiring in response to IN 86-03. The inspector reviewed
inspection records relating to the inspections and determined that only
Rockbestos SIS or Raychem flametrol wiring was used. The NRC inspection
team reviewed three Limitorque MOVs during the walkdown and determined
that qualified wiring (Rockbestos/Raychem) was installed. It was deter-
mined by the inspector that the licensee demonstrated adequate review and
actions prior to the issuance of IN-86-03 and after the notice was issued.
12.0 Equipment / Component Environmental Qualification File
The licensee's EQ files were examined to verify the nualified status of
the safety-related class IE equipment within the score of 10 CFR 50.49.
The review consisted of comparing plant service conditions with
qualification test conditions and verification of f.he basis for these
conditions. The inspectors selectively reviewed areas such as required
operating time compared to the duration of time the equipment has been
demonstrated to be qualified; similarity of tested equipment to that
installed in the plant (e.g., insulation class, component materials,
tested configuration versus installed configuration and documentation for
both); evaluation of adequacy of test conditions; aging calculations for
qualified life and replacement interval determination; effects of decreases
in insulation resistance on equipment performance; adequacy of demonstrated
~
equipment accuracy; evaluation of anomalies; and applicability of EQ
problems reported in IE Information Notices / Bulletins and their
resolutions.
The inspectors sampled 13 EQ files. The EQ files selected, covered such
areas as electrical cables, limitorque motor operated valves, pumps, cable
splices, radiation detectors and pressure / level transmitters. These files
contain documentation utilized by the licensee to provide a basis for
demonstrating that the equipment type is qualified, the equipment type
being a specific component or equipment, designated by the manufacturer
and model number, which is representative of all identical
equipment / components in a plant area exposed to the same or less severe
environmental service conditions.
In reviewing the files, the inspector identified EQ file Nos. J-601, J-373
and E-171 that contained deletions and whiteout changes to the original
text which had not been initialed or dated. The licensee was informed
that this item was in violation of Section 8.2.1 of procedure No.
VPN-NSD-07 which states that: "the use of whiteout and/or obliteration is
not permitted on Quality Assurance Records. Changes shall be made by a
single line drawn through the item with new information written in,
initialed and dated." This item is a violation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B,
Criterion V which states, in part, that: "Activities affecting quality
shall be accomplished in accordance with instructions, procedures...."
(354/88-03-01)
. -. . - . - _ _ _ _ __ . ..
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _. _ __
.
. .
13
During the file review, the team concluded that the EQ files were
difficult to audit. The EQ files are listed by purchase order number and
contain all the qualifying documents / reports applicable to each item of
equipment / component procured under that purchase order number. This makes
the file difficult to audit for equipment qualification in that the
individuals performing the audit must search out the applicable document
and determine its applicability. The EQ file index references each
section within the file generically, such as, reports, calculations,
correspondence, i.e. The licensee acknowledged the NRC concern and stated
that this was also a finding in their own audit (number NM-87-09) of the
EQ program, and is being considered as part of the programmatic develop-
ment of EQ within the new Engineering and Plant Betterment organization. ,
The licensee indicated that the EQ files will be restructured into a
generic equipment based system. The licensee has committed to provide a
plan and implementation schedule by April 15, 1988 to the NRC as to when
this task will be completed.
This item is unresolved pending NRC receipt and review of licenses's
completion schedule and action taken to simplify and improve EQ file
auditability (88-03-02).
13.0 Specific File Deficiencies
13.1 EQ File No. P301/p302 (Limitorque Motor Operated Valves)
The inspector reviewed the EQ file package for equipment / components
procured against purchase order Nos. P-301 and P-302. Thes3 EQ
files contained documentation used to support qualification of
Limitorque Motor Operated Valves (MOVs). During the file review,
two MOVs were identified in containment which used the Marathon 1600
Terminal Block. The inspector questioned the adequacy of the
Limitorque Test Report No. B-0119 to qualify the Marathon 1600
'
Terminal Block for in containment use.
The B-0119 report indicates the test configuration included a group
of terminal blocks in an operator (MOV) compartment enclosure. A
Marathon 300 Terminal Block and several Marathon 1600 Terminal
Blocks were used in the test group. Only the Marathon 300 Test
Block was energized during the LOCA testing. The Manufacturer of
Limitorque had concluded in their review and acceptance criteria
that the Marathon 300 Terminal Block was representative of other
Terminal Blocks in the test group. A similarity analysis was not on
file for comparison of the Marathon 300 Terminal Block and the other
test Blocks. However, a letter, dated January 29, 1988 was obtained
f rom Marathon Specialty Products company confirming similarity of
the Marathon 300 Terminal Block and the Marathon 1600 Terminal
Block.
.
-
.
,
14 ;
<
During the course of the inspection the licensee was able tc provide
a copy of a proprietary test report which qualifies the Marathon
1600 Terminal Block for limited use in containment. The test was
performed by Wyle Laboratories to satisfy the intent of IEEE-323-1974.
The Terminal Blocks were subjected to the environmental test program
specified in Wyle Test Procedure No. 6110-06-1 and described in test
Report No. 6110-06-2.
The LOCA test profile envelopes the Hope Creek profile. The
inspector concluded that the Marathon 1600 Terminal Blocks were
qualified to function in the LOCA environment for the time period
specified.
14.0 Plant Physical Inspection of Electrical Equipmpnt
The plant physical inspection consisted of an examination of safety-related
electrical equipment selected from the EQ Master List. Since the plant
was operational, the equipment selected was located and installed in
areas outside the containment. The equipment selected included:
Limitorque Motor Operated Valves, Pressure / Level Transmitters, Solenoid
valves, and electrical cable splices.
The inspector examined characteristics such as mounting configuration,
orientation, connection interfaces, moisture seals, model/ type, bend
radius, accessibility, cleanliness and physical condition.
Electrical cable splices were examined in four junction boxes located on
elevation 54'-0 and /7'-0. The inspector observed that all four junction
boxes (one safety-related 1F-DLV-F025) contaired dirt and debris. Some of
the debris appeared to be left over from construction. The licensee was
not able to explain the presence of the dirt / debris stating that each
system is inspected prior to turn over of the system by construction
personnel.
This item is unresolved pending NRC review of licensee review and
evaluation of the extent of the problem (354/88-03-03).
No other deficiencies were identified.
15.0 Unresolved Items
Unresolved items are matters which require more information in order to
ascertain whether they are acceptable items or violations. Unresolved
item (s) are discussed in Details, Paragraphs 12 and 14.
'
..
'
. .
,
15
16.0 Exit Meeting
The inspector met with licensee corporate and site personnel (denoted in
Details, paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on
January 29, 1988 at the plant site. The inspectors summarized the scope
of the inspection and the inspection findings at that time.
At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the
licensee.