IR 05000445/1988026

Insp Repts 50-445/88-26 & 50-446/88-22 on 880406-0503.No Violations,Deviations or Unresolved/Open Items Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Action on IE Bulletins,General Plant Insps, Fire Prevention/Protection & Soils & Foundations

ML20153E238
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	05/05/1988
From:	Livermore H, Phillips H NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To:
Shared Package
ML20153E232	List: IR 05000445/1988026 ML20153E230
References
50-445-88-26, 50-446-88-22, IEB-80-12, NUDOCS 8805090435
Download: ML20153E238 (5)

Text

.,_

, ...

4 4

.

P

, ,

- , .

J

>

s i

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS'

NRC Inspection Report: 50-445/88-26 Permits: CPPR-126 50-446/88-22

'

,

CPPR-127 .

'

Dockets: 50-445 Category: A2 ,

3 50-446 Construction Permit Expiration Dates:

Unit 1: August 1, 1988 Unit 2:' Extension request submitte ' Applicant: TU Electric-Skyway Tower 400 North Olive Street Lock Box 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 Facility Name: Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES),

Units 1 & 2 Inspection At: Comanche Peak Site, Glen Rose, Texas a

Inspection Conducted: April 6 through May 3, 1988- .

~

Inspector: -

.

/ 5/6/ff'

H. S. ~hillips; P Senior Resident Inspector Date Construction Reviewed by: / PAAMOi L E~ E~ h E H. H. Livermore, Lead Senior Inspector Date 8805090435 080506 PDR ADOCK 05000445 Q DCD

. - ,. - . .,-

.

. . . .

.,e

'T

-

' Inspection Summary:

Inspection conducted: April 6 through May 3, 1988 (Report 50-445/88-26; 50-446/88-22)

Areas Inspected: Unannounced, resident safety inspection of

. (1) applicant action on IE Bulletins (IEBs), (2) general plant inspections,-(3) fire prevention / protection, and (4) soils 'and

~

foundation Results: Within the areas inspected, no violations, deviations, or unresolved /open items were identified.

,

,

(*

>

f

,

<

l l

l l

\

!.

l l

'.4 . .

DETAILS Persons Contacted

• G. G. Davis, Nuclear Operations Inspection Report Item Coordinator, TU Electric

• T. L. Heatherly, Licensing Compliance Engineer, TU Electric y, *L. D. Nace, Vice President, Engineering & Construction, TU Electric

• C. M. Reynerson, Director of Construction, TU Electric

• A. B. Scott, Vice President, Nuclear Operations, TU Electric The NRC inspector also interviewed other applicant employees during this inspection perio * Denotes personnel present at the May 3, 1988, exit meetin . Applicant Action on IE Bulletins (Closed) IEB 80-12, "Decay Heat Removal System Operability":

This IEB was issued after an operating plant lost all decay heat removal (DHR) capability. The Information and Enforcement Bulletin (IEB) requires operating plants to:

(1) identify DHR events experienced, hardware and procedures to prevent DHR loss; (2) implement controls pending Technical Specification revision; and (3) report to the NRC.

l This IEB was inspected in NRC Inspection Report 50-445/88-12,

,

50 446/88-10 but was left open pending a review of test results.

,

During this inspection, the NRC Senior Residents for l construction and operations reviewed the preoperational test results (1CP-PT-58-01 and 02) which demonstrated system operation and DHR during cooldown. NRC NUREG/CR-4005, Closecut of IE Bulletin 80-12: Decay Heat Removal System Operability, also considered this issue resolve This item is closed.

l No violations or deviations were identifie . General Plant I,nspection, (50053, 50073, 51053, 51063, 52053)

At various times during the inspection period, the NRC inspector conducted genere.1 inspections of the Unit 1 reactor containment (RCB), safeguards (SGB), auxiliary (AB),

electrical control (ECB), and diesel generator (DGB)

buildings, the service water intake and the turbine building Selected rooms in these buildings were inspected to observe current work activities with respect to major safety-related equipment, electrical cable / trays, mechanical components, l

.

.

"

.. ..'

. 'i

' piping, welding, coatings, and Hilti bolts. The housekeeping, storage and handling conditions inside these buildings ~and various outside storage areas were also inspecte Work activities that were selected for more detailed inspections are described in paragraphs 4 and No violations or deviations were identifie . Fire Prevention / Protection (42051)

The NRC inspector observed plant conditions relative to material and heat source control in all areas described in paragraph 3 above. The plant was free of accumulated combustible materials and fire watch personnel were posted throughout the plant where welding was in proces In addition, the inspector reviewed the results of several TU Electric surveillances of plant conditions which included cleanliness and control of combustible material The inspector observed four cabinets with fire fighting accessories, ventilation equipment, lights, ladders, cutting l tools, first aid kits, extension cords, rope, dosimetry, i

'

ventilation ducts, fire hoses and air breathing oxygen units Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10. Fire Fighting Plans, Volumes I and II, were also available in these cabinet No violations or deviations were identifie . Soils and Foundations (46053)

During this inspection period, the MRC inspector followed up on previous inspection findings as described belo (Closed) open Item (445/8715-0-01): A White Deposit on Unit 1 Wal In August 1987, the NRC inspector noticed a streak of

,

white residue on the wall in the Unit 1 reactor vessel cavity (Room 153, Elevation 783). The inspector pointed this area l

'

out to TU Electric and the source was questione Subsequently, nonconformance CC-87-10443, Revision 0, was issued and it stated that mineral deposits were leaking

,

through the protective coating on the walls and ceilin Samples of the deposits were taken and were sent to Metallurgical Engineering Services, Inc., for testin The analysis showed that the deposits contained high amounts of calcium, potassium, and sodiu Small amounts of iron, magnesium and silicon plus trace amounts of other elements were foun The area was cleaned on October 14, 1987, and engineering monitored the spots for four weeks but no new deposits reappeare Engineering has monitored the area for another five months and found nothin _____ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ -________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .______ _ __ ______- _

'

, . . .

.

TU Electric concluded that this leak which was very small and slow was caused by an internal source. The internal source was probably caused by water used in the hydro test, modification to channel, or construction water. No structural or environmental significance was attached to this conditio In addition to the senior resident inspector's review, a NRC inspector responsible for civil structural areas reviewed the significance of this condition and concurred with the -

closecu This item is close No violhtions or deviations were identifie . Exit Meeting (30703)

,

An exit meeting was conducted May 3, 1988, with the

'

applicant's representatives identified in paragraph 1 of this report. No written material was provided to the applicant by the inspectors during this reporting period. The applicant did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during this inspectio During this meeting, the NRC inspectors summarized the scope

and findings of the inspection.

!

l l

l l

- . - _ - . . . . . - - _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ , , _ . . . _ _ . _ , . _ _ _ .