ML20206L834

From kanterella
Revision as of 21:31, 28 December 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Trip Rept of 860610-12 Meetings W/Ge in Rome,Ga Re Low Oil Event in Two Substation Transformers.Ie Info Notice Should Not Be Issued.Incident Isolated
ML20206L834
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 08/15/1986
From: Petrosino J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To: Heishman R
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
Shared Package
ML20204F806 List:
References
NUDOCS 8608200315
Download: ML20206L834 (4)


Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

  • = ,

UNITED STATES

[(gfAU%,?g g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

& j

\ *****/ August 15, 1986 MEMORANDUM FOR: Robert Heishman, Chief Vendor Program Branch (VPB)

Office of Inspection and Enforcement THRU: Ellis Merschoff, Chief Reactive Inspection Section, VPB Office of Inspection and Enforcement FROM: Joseph J. Petrosino ,

Reactive Inspection Section, VPB Office of Inspection and Enforcement

SUBJECT:

TRIP REPORT, DISPOSITION OF AN EGCB AND REGION I PROBLEM CONCERNING LOW OIL LEVEL IN GENERAL ELECTRIC (GE) SUB-STATION TRANSFORMERS AT THE OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERA-TING STATION

REFERENCE:

1. Memarandum, R.Baer (EGCB) to G.Zech (VPB), dated 2/7/86, abo /e subject.
2. VPB inspection report # 99901001, dated 4/4/86, General Electric-King of Prussia, PA.
3. LER # 50-219/85-14, above subject, Oyster Creek, dated 8/10/85.
4. NRC Region I inspection report No. 50-219/85-28, dated 11/7/85.

l RACKGROUND:

NRC Region I inspectors performed an inspection in late 1985 as a result of a l low oil event in two substation transformers at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (0CNGS). The OCNGS problem concerned two GE 4160/480-volt unit substation transformers which supply redundant 480-volt vital loads. A switchgear thermographic survey at OCNGS coincidentally identified incon-

.sistent temperatures in the unit transformer cooling fins. These inconsistent temperatures led to the discovery of low oil levels in the two transformers.

However, this condition did not appear to affect the operation of the transformers.

Following the discovery of the low oil level condition, the licensee shut down the reactor, contacted GE for technical assistance, and added oil to both of the transformers. Region I personnel and the OCNGS resident inspectors followed these licensee actions, subsequently issued their inspection report, and transmitted a draft Information Notice (IN) to R. Baer (EGCB) for IE's review and action.

8608200315 860815 PDR ADOCK 05000219

Robert F. Heishman August 15, 1986 DISCUSSION:

As a result of the inspection report and draft IN transmitted from Region I to IE/EGCB, a VPB inspection was recommended by R. Baer (EGCB). J. C. Stewart (EGCB) and I comprised the VPB inspection team. The purpose of this inspection was to review the circumstances of the low oil level problem at OCNGS, and to determine whether there was a basis for an IN.

Following my telephone discussions with GE personnel at Rome, Georgia and San Jose, California, it was decided that a VPB inspection would not be productive.

Therefore, I scheduled a series of meetings at the manufacturing facility where the transformers were built in Rome, Georgia. J. C. Stewart and I net with GE representatives on June 10-12, 1986. During the meetings, we reviewed procedures, design data, problem logs, and interviewed GE personnel. We were taken on a tour of the plant and observed the manufacturing processes. GE appears to have adequate manufacturing process controls and major deviations were not apparent.

CONCLUSION:

On the basis of discussions with GE personnel, observations by the inspectors, conservatism in the design basis for oil levels, and lack of other similar industry identified transformer problems, an IE Information Notice should not be issued at this time.

This incident appears to be an isolated occurrence; however, some of the infor-mation collected should be factored into the operating plant maintenance programs (see attached memorandum cover sheet). Therefore, all of the information obtained was transmitted by J. C. Stewart (EGCB) to the Maintenance and Training Branch of NRR (see attachments).

PERSONS CONTACTED:

W. J. Blad Engineering Services Manager, GE J. W. Martinschnig Process Control Engineer, GE E. J. Hritzo Nuclear Service Manager, GE R. J. Ristow Senior Design Engineer, GE E. C. Smith Lead QA Engineer, GE S. Pullani US NRC, Region I C. Skov GE, NEB 0-San Jose L. Bowers QA Manager, GE N. Felmus GE, NEBO-San Jose D. Tibbils GE, NEB 0-San Jose A. Dickinson Electrical Engineering Supv., GPU Nuclear, Oyster Creek

Robert F. Heishman August 15, 1986 No further action is deemed appropriate for the VPB.

I Joseph J. Petrosino Reactive Inspection Section, VPB Office of Inspection and Enforcement Attachments:

1. Memorandum for S. D. Ebneter (Region I) from R. L. Baer, dated July, 23, 1986.
2. Memorandum for H. R. Booher (NRR) from R. L. Baer, dated July 24, 1986 ,

cc with attachments: l i VPB Docket File #9991052 l RLBaer, IE SDEbneter, Region I  !

JMTaylor, D:IE ELJordan, DEPER l

DISTRIBUTION:

iDW:IE:091 VPB Reading JCStewart JGPartlow i BKGrimes EMerschoff l JPetrosino SASchwartz AWDromerick EWBranch DEPER R/F EGCB R/F i

l 4

VPB:DQAVT DQAVT JPetrosino:tt choff g /j /86 /)t/86 i

+

Robert F. Heishman August 15, 1986 No further action is deemed appropriate for the VPB.

Joseph J. Petrosino Reactive Inspection Section, VPB Office of Inspection and Enforcement Attachments:

1. Memorandum for S. D. Ebneter (Region I) from R. L. Baer, dated July, 23, 1986.
2. Memorandum for H. R. Bocher (NRR) from R. L. Baer, dated July 24, 1986.

cc with attachments:

VPB Docket File #9991062 1 RLBaer, IE SDEbneter, Region I JMTaylor, 0:IE ELJordan, DEPER i