ML20126C348

QA Program Insp Rept 99900716/85-01 on 850211-14.Major Areas Inspected:Failure of Interlocking Blade Fire Dampers to Close Under Normal Flow Conditions & Failure of electro-thermal Links to Function as Designed

ML20126C348
Person / Time
Issue date:	05/22/1985
From:	Merschoff E, Petrosino J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To:
Shared Package
ML20126C317	List: ML20126C312 ML20126C348
References
REF-QA-99900716 NUDOCS 8506140390
Download: ML20126C348 (1)

Text

8 ORGANIZATION: RUSKIN MANUFACTURING COMPANY GRANDVIEW, MISSOURI REPORT INSPECTION INSPECTION N0.: 99900716/85-01 DATE(S): 2/11-14/85 ON-SITE HOURS: 52 CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS: Ruskin Manufacturing Company ATTN: Mr. Thomas D. Hill President Box 129 3900 Dr. Greaves Road -

Grandview, Missouri 64030 ORGANIZATIONAL CONTACT: Mr. Richard Yarges, QA Manager TELEPHONE NUMBER: (816)761-7476 PRINCIPAL PRODUCT: Air handling components NUCLEAR INDUSTRY ACTIVITY: Approximately 6%

0 ASSIGNED INSPECTOR: 5/34/gf "J. Petrosino, Reactive Inspection Section (RIS) 'Date OTHER INSPECTOR (S): . L. Burns, Brookhaven National Laboratory APPROVED BY: -

E. W. MerschofG()2fiief, RIS, VPB Date INSPECTICN CASES AND SCOPE:

A. BASES: 10 CFR Part 21 B. SCOPE: 1. Review circumstances concerning Fire Dampers failing to close.

2. Obtain information regarding Electro-Thermal Link (ETL) pro-blems.

3. Obtain information for NRC evaluation of HVAC component generic issues and functionability.

850614039 9 % o %' "0 850613EmWg

ORGANIZATION: RUSKIN MANUFACTURING COMPANY GRANDVIEW, MISSOURI REPORT INSPECTION NO.: 99900716/85-01 RESULTS: PAGE 2 of 8 Plant Site Applicability:

Arkansas One (50-313), Beaver Valley 1&2 (50-334/412),

Bellefonte 1&2 (50-438/439), Braidwood 1&2 (50-456/457),

Browns Ferry 1,2&3 (50-259/260/296), Byron 1&2 (50-454/455),

Callaway 1 (50-483), Catawba 1&2 (50-413/414),.

Clinton 1 (50-461), Comanche Peak 1&2 (50-445/446),

D.C. Cook 1&2 (50-315/316), Davis Besse (50-346),

Diablo Canyon 1&2 (50-275/323), Duane Arnold (50-331),

Farley 1&2 (50-348/364), Hope Creek (50-354),

EI Hatch 1&2 (50-321/366), Indian Point 3 (50-286),

LaSalle 1&2 (50-373/374), Maine Yankee (50-309),

McGuire 1&2 (50-369/370), Millstone 3 (50-423),

Monticello (50-263), Oconee 1,2 & 3 (50-269/270/287),

Palo Verde 1,2, & 3 (50-528/529/530), Perry 1 (50-440),

Quad Cities 1&2 (50-254/265), River Bend (50-458),

Sequoyah 1&2 (50-327/328), South Texas 1&2 (50-498/499),

Susquehanna 1&2 (50-387/388), Turkey Point 3&4 (50-250/251),

Watts Bar 1&2 (50-390/391), Waterford 3 (50-382),

WPPSS 1&2 (50-397/460), Wolf Creek (50-482), and Zion 1&2 (50-295/304), (63 Total Plants).

a

^

ORGANIZATION: RUSKIN MANUFACTURING COMPANY GRANDVIEW, MISSOURI REPORT INSPECTION NO.: 99900716/85-01 RESULTS: PAGE 3 of 8 A. Inspection Issues:

1. Failure of interlocking blade fire dampers to close under normal flow conditions.

2. Failure of Electro-Thermal Links (ETL)-to function as designed, resulting in loss of fire damper closure capability.

B. Inspection Findings:

1. Ruskin Manufacturing Company (RMC) has adequately notified their affected purchasers in regard to fire dampers failing to close under normal duct flow. Additionally RMC recommended testing of the affected fire dampers to verify proper operation.

2. RMC documents were not in evidence to assure that the Palo Verde Gen-erating Station fire damper modifications were subject to complete design control measures, equal to those applied to the original design, prior to the actual field modifications being performed.

3. Installation problems with the ETL, and its associated conduit were identified at t e facilities.

C. Supplemental Information:

1. The NRC was notified by Ruskin Manufacturing Company, Grandview, Missouri by letter, on November 6, 1984, of an equipment deficiency with their curtain type interlocking blade fire dampers (IBFD).

The IBFDs are utilized to block air flow in Heating, Ventilating, Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems during a fire.

RMC manufactures IBFDs at their Parsons, Kansas facility. The affect-ed Model numbers are NIBD23, IBD23, and IBD21.

The Waldinger Corporation (TWC), Buckeye, Arizona, notified RMC of the deficiency by letter, dated August 3, 1984. Specifically, TWC iden-tified seven (7) dampers that failed to cycle during an Arizona Public Service system startup test.

RMC in their November 6, 1984 letter, states in part, "...the test methods originally utilized to test dampers under flow may not.. depict actual installed conditions...Ruskin recommends that fire dampers n

'. ORGANIZATION: RUSKIN MANUFACTURING COMPANY GRANOVIEW, MISSOURI REPORT INSPECTION NO.: 99900716/85-01 RESULTS: PAGE 4 of 8 supplied with closure springs, which require closure under air flow conditions be tested to verify proper operation.. .", and ". . . is currently researching... methods to modify fire dampers to ensure closure under air flow...".

2. RMC personnel indicated that at least three design modifications were planned or implemented at the Palo Verde Generating Station due to damper operability problems.

The design modifications include; (a) Modified blade catch assembly (b) Modified bottom blade bracket & spring attachment, and (c) Increased tension and size of negator spring.

Within this area the NRC inspectors reviewed documents and testing records to assure that the fire damper design changes were subject to design control measures equal with those applied originally.

Specifically, procedure no. 112084PV, for fire damper closure modi-fications, and two Ruskin 1985 fire damper testing reports were reviewed and provided incomplete assurance that complete design control measures had been implemented.

However, Ruskin submitted a RMC analysis report, dated 2/25/85 to the inspector several weeks after the inspection. The analysis states that RMC verifies the adequacy of the horizontal spring bracket assembly.

Complete design control measures appear to be in place with the addi-tion of this analysis.

3. Two additional def!ciencies were discussed in a review of Ruskin trip reports for their 2/85 Watts Bar, and 8/84 Palo Verde problem evalua-tion / inspection visits. These trips were made due to initial notifi-cation to RMC of fire damper closure problems. Both trips were per-formed to obtain information for use in RMC's problem evaluations.

The RMC Palo Verde evaluation resulted in the November 6, 1984, 10 CFR Part 21 report, and the Watts Bar problem resulted in a TVA noncon-formance report, number W-210P, and subsequent licensee 10 CFR 50.55(e) report.

e l

ORGANIZATION: RUSKIN MANUFACTURING COMPANY GRANDVIEW, MISSOURI REPORT INSPECTION NO.: 99900716/85-01 RESULTS: PAGE 5 of 8

a. A total of nine IBFDs with ETLs at Watts Eir and Palo Verde have experienced closure problems during startup and functional testing, due to electrical conduit interference. The electrical conduit causing the interference is typically attached to the ETL. After the ETL melts and separates, the conduit may block or spring against the damper blades. -

b. RMC's Watts Bar 2/85 trip report also noted two dampers that had not closed due to "S" hook interferences with the IBFD blade pack-ages where the blades were caught in the "S" hook loops.

"S" hooks are utilized to hold the ETL or Thermal Links across the fire damper blades, until " heat" melts the link and releases the damper. RMC uses "S" hooks on all IBF0 applications. RMC recom-mended to TVA that installation personnel be instructed on the proper orientation of "S" hooks at Watts Bar to prevent blade package interferences.

4. During a fire detection system test on November 20, 1984, TVA/ Watts Bar nuclear station identified 14 out of 47 Electro-Thermal Links (ETL) that "... failed to function as designed..." resulting in a loss of fire damper closure capability.

However, these failures do not appear to be the result of a failure of the ETL's to function as designed. As discussed in item 3.a above, other factors caused the fire damper closure failures. TVA has concluded that inadequate tension on the ETL, and other workmanship

, problems caused the failures. TVA has documented this root cause on their Watts Bar nonconformance report numbers W-210P and W-220P.

The lack of adequate tension applied to the ETL to cause link separa-tion, and electrical conduit interferences with the blade package may be generic issues.

w e - - - - , , - - - - - - -, - - - ,

^ *

. ORGANIZATION: RUSKIN MANUFACTURING COMPANY GRANDVIEW, MISSOURI REPORT INSPECTION NO.: 99900716/85-01 RESULTS: PAGE 6 of 8 D. Evaluation and Nuclear Application Information:

1. RMC manufactures nuclear related components at Parsons, Kansas and Minden, Louisana, (Louvers are manufactured at Minden and all other components at Parsons).

2. RMC components which may be utilized for nuclear applications are;

a. Sluce Gate Dampers

b. Louver Assemblies

c. Backdraft Dampers

d. Isolation Dampers

e. Control Dampers

f. Volume Dampers

g. Balancing Dampers

3. The highest failure rate of the curtain type fire dampers, in regard to closure under air flow, are those which are installed horizontally. The Waldinger Corp. letter, dated August 24, 1984 to RMC, states in part, IBFD cycling problem was "... judged to be isolated to the horizontal dampers...", as concluded by RMC.

4. IBFD closure spring (negator spring) tensions and sizes are being increased in most RMC applications, to aid closures.

5. Remote damper operators (actuators) are mainly utilized on shutter type dampers by RMC. Some typical actuator manufacturers used by RMC are: Bettis, Limitorque, ITT, Paul-Monroe, and Johnson. RMC is cur-rently completing the last of the Bettis actuator Elastomer-Lubricant

" change outs". The " change out" was due to a previous Part 21 report which identified an incompatability between the elastomer and lubricant on Bettis actuators.

6. Standards for manufacturing are Ur.derwriters Laboratory Standards UL 555 and UL 108.

Testing Standards utilized are Air Moving and Conditioning' Association (AMCA) Standard AMCA 500.

Wyle Laboratories performed seismic qualification testing for RMC's IBFDs on 3/23/79 & 7/22/80 per IEEE-344 requirments.

7. RMC stated that ETL installation instructions are provided to all customers. Instruction sheets are usually inserted between the fire damper and ETL prior to component shipping.

l

. ORGANIZATION: RUSKIN MANUFACTURING COMPANY GRANDVIEW, MISSOURI REPORT INSPECTION NO.: 99900716/85-01 RESULTS: PAGE 7 of 8

8. Installation instructions do not address RMC's IBFD orientation to air flow requirements.

9. The Ruskin NIBD23 Technical Data Sheet, states in part, "... ratings are based on AMCA standard 500 using test set up apparatus figure 5.3 (Damper installed with duct upstream &- downstream). . .". The original test results were actually based on figure 5.5 of AMCA-5000, which does not have duct installed downstream of damper. Due to this discrepancy, RMC has recommended that testing to verify fire damper closure under air flow be performed.

10. TVA/ Watts Bar has concluded that one or both of the following root causes prevented the closure of 14 out of 47 fire dampers, as indi-cated on Attachment A to TVA nonconformance report number W-210-P/

W-220-P.

a. Concealed damage to the ETL power leads or resistive bridge which occurred during handling, shipping, and/or installation.

b. Improper installation which resulted in inadequate tension on the ETL. This could have been caused by improper positioning of S-hooks or from external forces exerted by the flexible conduit connecting the ETLs to the power source.

E. Comments / Observations:

1. The RMC trip report to TVA/ Watts Bar dated 2/5/85 states in part, "...

majority of dampers in question are used for compartmentalization of the control room and are equipped with side seals and ETLs, and are referred to as Smoke Dampers...The side seals, which had been noted as previously holding up the blades, caused no problems during this test... Damper XFD-76 had jammed...the conduit may have held up the leading edge of. . . blade. . . Damper XFD-99. . . the conduit had fallen into the bottora of the frame, preventing complete closure... Damper XFD-74...

had section held open by a backwards "S" hook...".

2. South Texas Project purchase order specification required RMC's IBFDs to operate at 3,550 FPM velocity and maintain a 9 inch Water gage pressure. This P.O. revision was a licensee to Region IV correc-tive action commitment, which was completed.

3. RMC Interoffice Memo from Ruskins Palo Verde Project Manager to Ruskins Design Engineer, dated 12/13/84 states, "As you know, due to the recent testing of fire dampers under air flow for Palo Verde, modifications

ORGANIZATION: RUSKIN MANUFACTURING COMPANY GRANOVIEW, MISSOURI REPORT INSPECTION NO.: 99900716/85-01 RESULTS: PAGE 8 of 8 were made to the horizontal blade lock and spring attachment to blade.

Please verify these changes will not adversely affect the seismic quali-fication". The return memo from the Design Engineer, dated 12/12/85 states, "The changes recently made to the horizontal dampers (blade lock & blade spring attachment) will not adversely affect the seismic qualifications."

However, no design analysis, calculations or testing reports to verify i the validity of the above RMC statement could be produced. After the l conclusion of the NRC inspection, RMC approved an analysis titled, l

" Horizontal Spring Bracket Analysis", dated 2/25/85.

G. Persons Contacted:

Richard J. Yarges OA Manager Ruskin Manufacturing Cosslett W. Moore Project Manager Ruskin Manufacturing Robert Van Becelaere V.P. Engineering Ruskin Manufacturing Connie S. Hubbard QA Engineer Ruskin Manufacturing Tim Arnold Sr. Project Manager Ruskin Manufacturing Robert Strait

• Project Engineer The Waldinger Corp.

Donald Wheeler

• QA Supt. The Waldinger Corp.

Johns Ciminski* Project Manager The Waldinger Corp.

S.P. Weise* Engineering TVA Herb Wilhite* Engineering TVA Jim Worthy

• CDR-Engineering TVA

• Telephone contact only

.. REPCRT NO. 0 5 9 0 (2 2/.(r_ - 8 6~- 6 / PAGE /_ CF .3__

C:m u=NT5 9Evi=WED IN.SPECTO R Butus /fe rr>sud g TYPE DOC. NO. DATE_Rff COMMEN $

I QAn) 5ee..//0 y/g/ga y p. 9,o9 ra m 2 0 A/M des'h" G" h I Sec130 v/93 f 3 Qnin S ec. / 5 0

"/5/s3 f TasTiveTius, fixehen, s~d Drawayr y 4 gin sec. pio

't/r/83 4 7~.s7 Coav 6 /

5 GM1 Sec /M "his3/ y G"f"'. AT'b" f, 9Am sec. D 70 W/as y_ QK 2< co < n's 7 FRO Q-109 */'C/83_ 8_ Desrbu . Co o Tio l 8 920 P-!3 9  %/gg .2 __ pa ,r at dep u h y 6he7s j /A ><c E'-o-<-i c) P40 P-173 y/c/sa o 96. Msco<ds 8 1,oced'u rt 10 Pio f-/77 S/r/93 I Co , , ec Tis Mc fica

~

ll 3LidaecI ninCA-500 /98 3 7?*s 7's)/# Nodi 5" A***!!si $2*Mo A.50 *I?I

/.2 564ed (_jj.555 l979 .3_ S/;Ja,/ for 54ftfy - Ne Dawgs f_Q r '"/*'f

/3 Spec. _~ ~

_ SM Aa hefs - E77 7~s4//ayu .;TarTi3_cb~t _

/V .5pec /udD-23 /971 ~_ R/1)C-/JJAG23 /)od>cTI~~ br*a bon $dte f ii .7///1) ~

>$4/9t/ .

Ais Uro/e O., ;eic[ & STra e/< Ts

7. R<<aJe' )

/4 tw7 fp-2 n/s/93 . #us b,,Jse;~c Quo I .G.-, e i -_

/7 epr g5 a pp-A _7/p/g __ tM,/e/sewxic Dm/ary fs7^ryga<f (s <4y,a)

/2 2Pr c/Y453-I 34 3/79 _ u ,t / s n ,c S,- v/s % 3: r /o ,,,,, (2 <4., ,,, ). .

/9 A c,9 -

_ P,op c.~k i J of_ (it 74 - /"<w~1 ).

~

?o f&p f~ V%/oC 13s r brui -Hariz 5,0<<~r C/osatfph Td4ks

>> sr -

+hr L psr 4,r- re,rai r,,, ar.<< (pgraAr_ -

1. 1. 1e/for f/>ko _ _ /?e raine, Clib, , ameer,7 J/ /s.NEcJo ie 7fer-e?3 _ mecas .rpi~r /3<ader shd$er1%

DW6 _ 5398 ')*/so- - . . - . . . -- ..

DWG.: DRAWING PRC. P7CCEDUPE E0. -FURC H at. OoCE R SPEC.' SPECIFICATION Q AM.= Q. A.M A %.! A L l.M.= IN TERNA L MFM0

REPORT NO. S$9007/4 - 890/ PAGE $_ QF 3 0 ' C'J >E N TS REVlFWED INSPECTOR Butw/Ie'nosiis

& TYP~ DOC.NO. DATE Me/ COMMEN 5 aY _seme -

'fu/so - .

spr>~r 2n & rnaf6e %e dchs1 vo<t -

2T Dwc,- swl %Ao

~

_b'/tos3 &~r Brubr inas' G* b - _ _ . . _

DC pur,- sesr %As - mm3 r , ~ k c b r a s, X & t,y 97 aois 1rsT - -

Whho A 72 ssN,JJ- af&ct#el Cushwr

?8 i.erte, -

%Aci _

p ,r si nec nor,NeJ.c -Day L'/2 %e 29 70 h G t _

_ - %/o <J Cus ts re<<

go seite, -

iffy - (emc to nzco Wic:a - PT-s/

3/ iem e $?YSb %hr _ 7 dave's ni'<d e AU I"' '~r 7* '"' )

32 ieme %hv no116r,,,(amc ra rpis.) .2co/asi 33 ze,x.,

>$h ei ,,,,7;r,;at< x (ti>>c to nae-a p) na/3'Y 39 ie ire, '44, u. 7, 'fa.1,.- (e <><c.

r., a-er. E/n. ) 31.g/s/S 3C i, ye,  %/ga n,r,g,.t, (aac y,___s,,, w,,,) vrfvapssAsy 36 2<rh e _

_ .b?/or __ fesfa %nre.' (nex& ro amc) 10 x 2/ _ _ _ _

3' ierfer in-e5n urkg i s.in,,oa,,,,,,/upra,r,,,,,1 fs,es,7,e,,c}

3* 1 e TI#<

%4v _ ao rk ri,, - (orc 7. ads,,,)x6 7s/a7' h Letter  %/rv _ ,va;r,ca,s .fsmc 7, sm,~ ) vishiy .-

yo Leiter _ _._ IW7__ n.1,% 7,.- (enc - eas g.) w/3 70 yt ze tte, '%ke _ n.T, % 71,- (emt ro eaard asy

'/2 lene<  %/ev __ n.7,56t,,~ cemc 7. e-cini) </82/v83 03 1 ewer 'A

. /sv _iv'1&&h,x u (tsc rs decai) .2s0/2rt

"" delhe "4/sv _ v. 7: Gar,,u lizmc ro snircl) </c_o._._..

W Le We< 6ec-us-oi 'b4r _ 'b,<ar i to 4e a~w/<J/, to wiss):(8k, ratsc) 46 4dter v-s83 / q n ..... p. ,. nr r;, mrar 6 -(ako-10 src) assts' rt gg . . _ - .

DWG.- DRAWING PRC. PECEDURE PO. -PURC H A S E ORDE R SPEC. SPECIFICATION Q AW Q. A.M A N U A L l.M.= IN TERNAL MFMO

e REPCRT NO. 0590 PGES OF 3 C'C m=NT5 9EVIFWED .TN.5PECTOR Bo <~s j'A 7ro sino g TYPE D'X. NO. DATE CW MEN S J

Q le/fr e b/8Y A)o 71See Yb (Riric 7a ts-eATo)) 3J1/3&4 --

V8 )e Tfer Y'/ay _A)oyi fe'a ti.a /nmc ra 2 /o/d 19f/3s9 L}9 ie b< 'A/8y a 7,Nha% (tac to sr <~<) wbia 50 Lewe< 'bdy sv. 7,Ak t,,;. (tme 70 n>~a)'!AlNr1 3*/ /eTltt 37fJxs-03 //9 'h/g y 0a-yees wi// -le "fACNol # (Ta5,=nL To tac) <o' 9 9/YPf 5A At7)Y*r Y'/94 gtja71$ca bk> [LJMC - J'om EJ fP 33/

53 Le Tfer ___

f'ky__. Ala Ti6ca Ti ,o (emcQM<sey ca.) </ /yyf st/ Le trer "b/oR/Ah 265 s70 s1 yrer _

"hkv noto L% (esc ro n,m.~ c.~ D 2n/sc s~ ~

56 Le74< %4v so 7< % 1;+ fesie e p cte) p s b a 3 _

59 Le %r _ _

_'hby sloD%tig [syc p ,4J,gw;,') sb7/3sg__ _

f* O L e liit h64 d

/20itbteYtea._ fAMC To . s 4sA/J')2 Y7/ABG

&I L e lier "h/a NonL&f'onc ro % iwd) yre/scrr _

6A Lefer '%/e9 Aot,6aess(emc l r sr.~, e usa) D Y{J!a/ta3 _

b2 1e & < _ _

"l' ley __ A4 7,&t,;/qg_x,._ ruecs J.vyWW& _._ ._

6') Leth>< Y/9y ,

AJo Tik}r L ffn9C Ti 7YM]240/259/a 32 7/32ff 390) 74/'ffl/

9/ Y C5 Ae iter 'Y'by A s y; C a t, y ( A s c [a 7Eco)_ 3 Y4__ __ _ _ _ _ ___

G6- 1e 7/tr 'Y'/sY AloriBeafim(finc re ta/a/65e,6,~N sM/r?9kJO 67 1e'115e 'll'/sy No7;6eaL~(enr70 wessE 48 h17er 'b/9Y _No7,6 %{fn*cfa zae{) 2sY/xs/s73/s79/'Y&I

@ Lr/fer '/*/oy C/4in6-C .,te< salaae 4<-s (pmc-7a-en4 te/).275/L73 TYPE CODE:

DWG. - DRAWING FRc.= PECEDUPE Eb.-FUpc H ah GoCER SPEC.' SPECIFICATION Q AV.= Q. A.M A % A L l.M.= IN TERNAL MFMO