|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{Adams
| | #REDIRECT [[IR 05000482/1986014]] |
| | number = ML20211N907
| |
| | issue date = 06/25/1986
| |
| | title = Insp Rept 50-482/86-14 on 860512-16.Deviation Noted:Failure to Have Qualification Summaries & Environ Evaluation Worksheets for Vulkene Supreme Wiring & Kulka Terminal Blocks Used in Harsh Environ
| |
| | author name = Ireland R, Norman D
| |
| | author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
| |
| | addressee name =
| |
| | addressee affiliation =
| |
| | docket = 05000482
| |
| | license number =
| |
| | contact person =
| |
| | document report number = 50-482-86-14, IEIN-83-72, IEIN-86-003, IEIN-86-3, NUDOCS 8607110076
| |
| | package number = ML20211N885
| |
| | document type = INSPECTION REPORT, NRC-GENERATED, INSPECTION REPORT, UTILITY, TEXT-INSPECTION & AUDIT & I&E CIRCULARS
| |
| | page count = 7
| |
| }}
| |
| See also: [[see also::IR 05000482/1986014]]
| |
| | |
| =Text=
| |
| {{#Wiki_filter:. - . , - _ _ - . . . - - - - - . - .. - - - . - -
| |
| !
| |
| *
| |
| .
| |
| '
| |
| .
| |
| f
| |
| APPENDIX B
| |
| U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
| |
| REGION IV
| |
| '
| |
| NRC Inspection Report: 50-482/86-14 License: NPF-42
| |
| :
| |
| ,
| |
| Docket: 50-482
| |
| '
| |
| Licensee: Kansas Gas and Electric Company
| |
| ,
| |
| P. O. Box 208
| |
| 3
| |
| Wichita, Kansas 67201
| |
| !
| |
| ! Facility Name: Wolf Creek Generating Station !
| |
| Inspection At: Burlington, Kansas
| |
| Inspection Conducted: May 12-16, 1986
| |
| i
| |
| i
| |
| Inspector A 24 m ?~ A
| |
| _
| |
| 4/-2f/fd i
| |
| j D. E. Norman, React'or Inspector, Engineering Date
| |
| Section, Reactor Safety Branch
| |
| '
| |
| i
| |
| j l
| |
| i
| |
| !
| |
| I
| |
| f
| |
| '
| |
| Approved: M2Y M- - ~'- # 4/-P.r/N
| |
| : R. E. Ireland, Chief Engineering Section, Date
| |
| j Reactor Safety Branch
| |
| .
| |
| l Inspection Summary
| |
| j Inspection Conducted May 12-16, 1986 (Report 50-482/86-14)
| |
| .
| |
| Areas Inspected: Special, announced inspection to determine what wiring is i
| |
| i
| |
| '
| |
| installed in Limitorque operators and to review licensee's environmental
| |
| documentation to ensure that qualification of wiring is adequately established. i
| |
| i The inspection also included a review of the licensee's actions relative to ;
| |
| Information Notices (IN) 83-72 and 86-03.
| |
| ! Results: The inspection determined that Limitorque operators, which had ;
| |
| i
| |
| previously been reported to be qualified by Limitorque or Westinghouse,
| |
| 1 contained internal wiring and/or terminal blocks which could not be shown to be
| |
| -
| |
| . qualified-to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.49. The licensee had inspected most !
| |
| I of the Limitorque operators, and in response to IN 83-72 and IN 86-03 had
| |
| i replaced unqualified wiring and terminal blocks in several operators. However, l
| |
| 44 operators qualified by the NSSS had apparently not been inspected. Wiring
| |
| '
| |
| i
| |
| i ,
| |
| '
| |
| l
| |
| , 8607110076 860708 [
| |
| 1 PDR ADOCK 05000482
| |
| G PDR
| |
| _ , . , , . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ , _ _ . _ _ _ . . - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ , _ _ _ _ . ~ . _ . _ . - _ -
| |
| | |
| . _ - -
| |
| *
| |
| .
| |
| 2
| |
| which appears to be unqualified was found in one of those operators during this
| |
| inspection. Also, the licensee had identified several operators with
| |
| unidentified wire or terminal blocks, and no apparent corrective action had
| |
| been taken to assure that these items were qualified.
| |
| !
| |
| !
| |
| l
| |
| I
| |
| :
| |
| !
| |
| 1
| |
| '
| |
| l
| |
| ,
| |
| , - - - ---w -- .. , - - - - - . - - - . - - - - - - - , - - , - - , - -
| |
| | |
| *
| |
| .
| |
| 3
| |
| DETAILS
| |
| '
| |
| 1. Persons Contacted
| |
| Kansas' Gas and Electric
| |
| *C. J. Hoch, Q.A. Technician
| |
| W. M. Lindsay, Supervisor, Quality Systems
| |
| *M. G. Williams, Superintendent, Reg. and Adm.
| |
| N. Hoadley, Lead Engineer, NPE
| |
| D. Walsh, Supervisor, Maintenance Services
| |
| D. Glogowski, Maintenance Engineer
| |
| *C. J. Pendergrass, Licensing Engineer
| |
| *K. Petersen, Lead Engineer, Licensing
| |
| J. A. Zell, Manager, Nuclear Training
| |
| *F. T. Rhodes, Plant Manager
| |
| *J. Goode, Licensing Engineer
| |
| D. Rich, Superintendent, Maintenance
| |
| R. L. Hoyt, Senior Engineering Specialist
| |
| J. L. Houghton, Operations Coordinator
| |
| *R. M. Grant, Director, Quality
| |
| *A. A. Freitag, Manager, NPE
| |
| *W. J. Rudolph, Manager, QA
| |
| *0. L. Maynard, Manager, Licensing
| |
| *D. R. Prichard, Engineer, NPC
| |
| *J. A. Bailey, Director, Engineering and Tech Services
| |
| *G. D. Boyer, Superintendent, Technical Support
| |
| Bechtel
| |
| C. E. Jeniks, Acting Lead, Electrical
| |
| NRC
| |
| J. E. Gagliardo, Chief, Reactor Projects Branch
| |
| *J. E. Cummins, Senior Resident Inspector
| |
| *B. L. Bartlett, Resident Inspector
| |
| *D. E. Norman, Reactor Inspector
| |
| * Denotes those present during exit interview on May 16, 1986.
| |
| 2. Purpose
| |
| The purpose of this inspection was to identify wiring used in Limitorque
| |
| valve operators installed in a harsh environment, to review the licensee's
| |
| environmental qualification documentation to ensure that qualification of
| |
| wiring was adequately established, and to review the licensee's actions
| |
| relative to IN 83-72 and IN 86-03.
| |
| | |
| -- - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
| |
| .
| |
| *
| |
| .
| |
| 4
| |
| 3. Inspection Summary
| |
| a. Review of Previous Licensee Actions
| |
| Approximately 114 Limitorque operators are installed in a harsh
| |
| environment at Wolf Creek. Because of reported qualification
| |
| problems concerning the operators, the licensee performed inspections
| |
| ,
| |
| in July 1984, which identified problems in wiring, terminal blocks,
| |
| limit switches and mounting orientation for the operators. During
| |
| the licensee's inspection, all 11 operators covered by M-225
| |
| specification were found to have unidentified wires. The wires were
| |
| w
| |
| subsequently) replaced
| |
| Requests (WR 90306-85 with90316-85.
| |
| through qualifiedThe
| |
| ' ires in accordance
| |
| operators were model with Work
| |
| number SMB with serial numbers ranging from 238481 to 290374.
| |
| Unidentified wires were also found in operator KAHV-0030 (S/N 321295,
| |
| Spec. No. 231C, Model SMB.) and there was no documentation to show
| |
| ';
| |
| that the wires were changed or determined to be qualified. This is a
| |
| potential violation of 10 CFR 50.49. (482/8614-01)
| |
| The licensee inspection also revealed that several types of terminal
| |
| blocks were being used in Limitorque operators. In addition to the
| |
| terminal blocks, for which qualification data was available (Marathon
| |
| 300/1600, Buchanan 0222/0524, GE EB-5 and Curtis Type "L"), Kulka
| |
| blocks were found and some others were not identif;able. There was
| |
| no documentation to show that the unidentified terminal blocks were
| |
| changed or determined to be qualified. This is a potential violation
| |
| of 10 CFR 50.49. (482/8614-02.) The Kulka tenninal blocks are
| |
| discussed later in this report.
| |
| The licensee had also identified unqualified limit switches found
| |
| during their inspection. This information will be reviewed by NRC
| |
| during a subsequent inspection (open item 482/8614-03).
| |
| b. Hardware Inspection
| |
| (1) Sample Selection
| |
| The master list of safety-related equipment located in a harsh
| |
| environment was reviewed and a sample of 10 operators was
| |
| selected to be inspected. Selection of the sample was based on
| |
| the 1ollowing criteria: (a) operators from several safety
| |
| systems, (b) range of Limitorque serial numbers, (c) at least
| |
| one operator previously inspected by the licensee, (d) operators
| |
| qualified by both Limitorque and the NSSS contractor, and
| |
| (e) operators located outside high radiation areas.
| |
| - -
| |
| | |
| - -. .
| |
| *
| |
| .
| |
| 5
| |
| .
| |
| ,
| |
| The following operators were included in the sample:
| |
| *a. EMHV-8802A(S/N216087)
| |
| *b. EJHV-8809A (S/N 200677)
| |
| c. ENHV-0006 (S/N 238482
| |
| : d. LFHV-106 (S/N 256091
| |
| e. EGHV-127 (S/N260401
| |
| f. EGHV-061 (S/N 271908
| |
| -
| |
| 9 EFliV-31 (S/N286123)
| |
| h. EFHV-47 (S/N315153)
| |
| 4 1. EGHV-133 (S/N321898)
| |
| *j. BGHV-8105 (S/N 247314)
| |
| *apparently not inspected by licensee.
| |
| (2) Findings
| |
| Each operator was inspected to establish the type of internal
| |
| wiring. Most longer wires could be identified by wiring
| |
| , manufacturer markings; however, many short wires did not have
| |
| i markings and were identified by visual comparison to previously
| |
| ; identified wires. Nine of the operators had a combination of
| |
| Rockbestos Firewall III, Raychem Flamtrol, or Vulkene Supreme
| |
| wiring. Most of the wires in operator EJHV-8809A were colored
| |
| blue and were marked "Techbestos."
| |
| Field wiring which interfaced with the operators was also
| |
| inspected. All wires appeared to be of the same type; however,
| |
| specific identification could not be made at this interface,
| |
| since the jariet material which contained the markings was not
| |
| ,
| |
| visible.
| |
| !
| |
| c. Documentation Review
| |
| (1) Equipment Qualification Cover Sheet
| |
| Each operator specification numba h.s an EQ cover sheet,
| |
| Equipment Evaluation Workshent (~E9) and a summary of
| |
| qualification details, such ar; 100 . iption of equipment-
| |
| qualified, specified and 'quah rleu u,vironment, qualification
| |
| method, qualified life, and reports used to establish-
| |
| qualification. The description of qualified equipment includes
| |
| such items as motor type, and terminal block type. During the
| |
| licensee walkdown inspections, certain wiring and terminal
| |
| blocks were identified (i.e., Vulkene Supreme wiring and Kukla
| |
| terminal blocks) which were neither' discussed nor referenced in
| |
| the qualification documentation. Therefore, no trail exists for
| |
| making a' determination of the qualification status of these
| |
| items. This is an apparent deviation from the EQ program plan
| |
| - . - . - - - - - - - -
| |
| | |
| . . . . . . . - - - -
| |
| . ,
| |
| . .' *
| |
| .
| |
| 6
| |
| ;
| |
| '
| |
| described in the " Environmental Description of Safety Related
| |
| Electrical Equipment" submitted by letter dated January 17,
| |
| 1986. (482/8614-04)
| |
| (2) Cable Pull Cards
| |
| Cable pull cards for field cable interfacing with operators
| |
| EMHV-8802A and EGHV-127 were reviewed to establish cable
| |
| I identity. Cables _ identified were Rockbestos 600V control cable,
| |
| and Anaconda low voltage power cable. Qualification of these
| |
| cables is reported in test reports E-057-020-03 and
| |
| E058-005-030, respectively.
| |
| (3) Vendor Qualification Reports
| |
| Vendor and/or test lab qualification test reports for wiring and
| |
| terminal blocks included in the operators were reviewed. The
| |
| following discrepancies were identified as a result of this -
| |
| 1
| |
| review:
| |
| (a) There was no qualification test report available for G.E.
| |
| Vulkene Supreme wire which was installed in some operators.
| |
| The basis for qualification was a G.E. Product Data
| |
| Pamphlet dated June 30, 1977, which states that the wiring
| |
| is qualified to IEEE Stds. 323-74 and 383-74 and which
| |
| presents certain qualification data. The data presented is
| |
| stated to be subject to change without notice. Therefore,
| |
| there is no basis for demonstrating qualification of the
| |
| Vulkene wiring to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.49. This.
| |
| is a potential violation of110 CFR 50.49. (482/8614-05)
| |
| (b) There was no qualification test report or basis for
| |
| '
| |
| determining qualification of Techbestos wire which was
| |
| identified during this inspection. This failure te
| |
| demonstrate qualification is a potential violation of
| |
| 10 CFR 50.49. (482/8614-06) ;
| |
| (c) It was stated previously in this report that there was no
| |
| audit trail for Kulka terminal blocks in the Limitorque
| |
| operator qualification documentation, even though these
| |
| '
| |
| i terminal blocks had been identified by the licensee. The
| |
| basis of qualification of the terminal blocks was stated by
| |
| the licensee to be the " Design Qualification Report for
| |
| Feedthrough/ Adapters Model assemblies ISP-719," dated
| |
| , October 4, 1983. In'this report, Kukla 602 series terminal
| |
| . blocks _were qualified as a part of the electrical
| |
| '
| |
| . penetrations. There was no documentation to show that the
| |
| terminal blocks were' identical to or~ similar to those
| |
| l identified in Limitorque operators, nor had an analysis
| |
| I been performed to predict qualified life in the operator
| |
| I
| |
| .,
| |
| .
| |
| T
| |
| - - - -- -- .-, , _ , . , _ _ _ . . - - , , ,,,,.,y ., -,,,._,.,.,,o e ,,,,,,,,~.,..__.-4,.--yy..,. - . -
| |
| | |
| - . .
| |
| *
| |
| . .
| |
| 7 ,
| |
| environment. This failure to demonstrate qualification is
| |
| a potential violation of 10 CFR 50.49. (482/8614-07)
| |
| 4. Exit Meeting
| |
| An exit meeting was held on May 16, 1986, with the persons identified in
| |
| paragraph 1 during which time results of the inspection were discussed.
| |
| .
| |
| - - .-- - -
| |
| }}
| |