IR 05000528/1975001
Text
..
..
'
.
',
. s.T
'
-
.
...,
,
-
',
,-
.,
,
.
. ~.'
,
.
-
-
.
-
O. S. NUCLEAR RECULATCT3 CC ^!ISSION s.
,
'
'
- *0FFICE OF INS?ECTION A:'D ENFORCEMENT
.
,
.
...,
-
.
.
'
REGION V
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
,.
.
,
,.. -,.
.
.
-
.
,
.
.
..
.
,
'
.
50-528. 529. 530ns 01 50-628 413 Inspection Raport No.
.
>
Docket No.50-529;50-53C
'
.
Licensee A, i mu D. m, e.., n. e._ _...
- - - -,,,
P. O. Box 21646 de. yo,
..
,
,
,
t
--
Phoenix, Arizona 85036 Priority
'
~A
.
Pelo Verde Units 1-3 Category Facility
.
Leestion Suckeve. Arirenn
.
.
,
.
.
.
t hypeofTacility_
- i,
.
Second Pre-Construction Permit /SER CA Insoection Type of Inspection
-
,
.
.
July let,1975 Dates of Inspection
.-
.
,
November 4-5. 1975 Dates of Previods Inspection
,
.
Nhwc2 b *
.
'
u a s 4,71
Principal Inspector Date
/
.
R. J. Pate, Reactor Inspector
.
.
Y 9.hnu a 1'C' '
isJA W.
scompanying Inspectors
"*
L. J.'Garvin, Reactor Inspector
,
'
.
,
Date
.
..
.
.
'
Othat Accompanying Personnel None
'
.
-
I Ylf
' A a n c1
-
Enviewed by Date
,=
-
.
G. 5. Spencer, Chief Reactor Const'ruction and
'
Operations Branch
.*
'.
.
.
'
,
-
.
,
.
C l
0500150432 0D0703 e'
i
.
.
PDH LC10HTOH4-g?3 PDR
'
.
.
.
.
,
'
"
-
___ __ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.__
'
.
..
.
..
.
SU!"MP.Y Enferre ent A: tion Not applicable.
Licensee Action on Previously identified Enforcement items Not applicable.
Other Sionificant Findines Current Findings A.
Administration and Orcanization
.
R. L. Robb has been reassigned to assume all the responsi-bilities assigned to tr.e title Nucicar Services Manager shown in the Falo '.'erde QA Manual.
(Faragraph3ofcatails.)
- B.
Status cf Fuel Load Dates The fuel load dates have been changed as follows:
Old Date New Date
.
.
Unit 1 11/80 11/81 Unit 2 5/82 11/83 11/83 11/85 Unit 3
-
(Paragraph 4ofdetails.)
Status of Previously identified Unresolved Ite.s The following concerns identified during the previous inspection, were examined and closed out.
A.
The project procedure pertaining to the documentation of the review prccess nas been clarified.
(Paragraph 7cofDetails.)
B.
The project procedure for the filing system, NS-7, was issued 2/10/75.
(Paragrapn 6 of details.)
.
%
-
.
-
-
.
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_____ __
__
.
.
.
.
_
-
,
...'
..,. -.
_o_m_...
......
s..
...es_......,,,.....-
.
,
...
.
.
.
..
.
-
l
.-
- .
-
-
-
.
. -3-
_
-
-
-
..
,
,
.
s..
.-
.
.
.
,..
.
.
.
C.
The internal audit of design control as it pertains to Arizona
...,..
Public Service (APS) was completed on 2/4/75. Also there was
' '
'
an audit of APS's procurement document control on 6/25/75 and i
7,,..,;..
,,,,,6/ 26/75.
(No reference.)
.
D.,
Additional training of the QA secretary was completed by
' ' #.
12/13/74 'on QA Directives. She also attended other QA train-
--
.e.
.-
+:ing sessions on 1/21/75 and 6/12/75.
(Noreference.)
-
,
,
Management Interview
'
ihe results of the inspection were discussed with Messrs. Van Brunt, Roedel and Robb.
The following commitments were made by the Arizona Public Service management.
,
,
Records will be maintained of the training (and orientation of A.
I audit team members for all future audits.
Paragraph 5.B. of
.
details.),
'
i
.
't.
The audit of Bechtel Power Corporation instructions, proca-dures, and drawings will be completed by the end of July 1975.
, (Paragraph 5.B. of details.)
,
,
C.
The current audit schedule will be revised to show only audits
'
-
which are applicable at this time.
(Paragraph 5.B. of details.)
.
.
D.
Project procedure NS-3 for review of technical documents will be clarified by September 1,1975 to indicate the authority of the Nuclear Services Manager (Assistant Project Director) in assigning level of document review. (Paragraph 6 of details.)
E.
'The requirement for safeguarding important one-of-a-kind QA
documents will be incorporated into a Nuclear Services (NS)
j procedure.(Paragraph 6ofdetails.)
s
-
.
,
e
.
,
e f
9 f
-
.
t
.
m
--
=
- =_
(.
..
\\
.
-
'
..
,
l
.
DETAILS
'
'
1.
Persons Centsc ed
..
.,
.
E. E. VanBrunt, Jr., Vice President fluelear Services l
J. A. Roedel, QA danager R. L. Robb, Assistant. Fr: ject Director J. A. Gould, Electrical Engineer
A. C. Rogers Senior Ccr.sulting Engineer
'
J. M. Karvelis, Secretary S. Campbell, QA Secretary ll. Hurst, Civil Engineer 2.
General
!
l Activities accomplished since the initial pre-CP QA inspection
.
j include (1) the filing of eight amendments to the PSAR and (2) the filing of two amendnents to the Environmental Statement. Several i
.
j training sessions have teen conducted by QA since the last 'iRC inspecticn. Also severai audits of both Eechtel Power Corporation (Bechtel) and Combustien Engineering (CE) have been made.
3.
Administratten and Orcar.ization i
There has been a reassignment of two people in the Palo Verde
[
project organization.
R. L. Robb, Assistant Project Director, has t
.
i been reassigned to assure all the responsibilities assigned to the
[
title lluclear Services r.anager shown in the Palo Verde CA Manual.
Mr. Robb is an employee :( the Salt River Project Agricultural
'
!
Improvement and Power District on loan to the Palo Verde proje" organi:ation.
The Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and l
Power District is a majcr joint owner of the Palo Verde fluclear
Generating Station.
!
bl. M. Petro has been reassigned from Site Construction Representative
,
to Site Construction Manager.
The qualifications of QA and engineering personnel contacted were
-
examined and found to te adequate to implement the P.alo Verde QA
,
!
program.
.
,
4.
Status l
The fuel load dates have been changed as shown in the sumary. APS l
management stated tnat tnis celay is due to the quantities of
!
materials being large an tney will take longer than originally l
planned to install.
'
.
r
>
a
--
- -
- - - - -
. -
.
. -.
.. - - -
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
. _...
_
-
._-
J.,....,
, n ~ -
..... -.
.
. _.....
..
,.
.
.
.,
..
...
.
,
.
W-
,
..
.
.
. Purchase orders have been piaced 'for reinforcing steel and 480 volt substations. A review of bid evaluation for miscellaneous steel and steel decking has been completed. The review of specifications for
.
-procurement is presently active or ccmpleted on several items in-cluding structural steel, containment building liner plate system, personnel air locks and equipment hatch, containment post tensioning
'
system and shop fabrication of nuclear service piping.-
5.
0A Procram Review
.
.
,
-
A.
Manual Review
.
(1) The control and distribution of the QA Manual was '
examined.
No record of updating Manual No. 27 to
.
Revision 1 was found. tJpon further investigation, it was confirmed that the manual was updated and the records
'
were corrected. All other control and distribution records examined were found satisfactory.
-
,
,
(2) The QA Manual was reviewed for areas that iequired
'
l
'
implementation by APS. Approximately 50 areas were identified which required either explanation or docu-
'
'
~
mented evidence of. implementation. All items were
.
.
satisfactorily resolved except questions on training of audit personnel and completion of planned audits.
.
(Seeparagraph5.B.)
.
.
B.
The audit program of APS was reviewed.
Since the last in-
'
spection by the NRC, APS has audited CE-Chattanooga, CE-Windsor, Bechtel Engineering and Bechtel vendor surveillance and has made internal audits.
.
'
'APS has established an audit frequency schedule for the major contractors, i.e. Bechtel and CE, and for internal audits.
l-This schedule includes the annual audit requirements for each
,
.
of the 10 CFR 50, Appendix B. eighteen criteria.
In accordance with this schedule, APS has met their audit requirements for all
.
criteria except the audit of instructions, procedures and drawings at Bechtel. An audit of this area is planned. APS
.
. management stated that this audit lwould be made by the end of l
July.
All of the annual audit requirements for the audit of CE and
'
APS QA programs have not been completed over the past year.
Audits of these criteria are not applicable at this time in the project, although they will probably be applicable at a
.
s
.uS.
,,
.-
- -., -
,
-
,, - - -.
- - - -
-
-
-- -
-
--
.---
.
.
.
-
.
..
.
l
-
.
.g.
.
..
later time. dPSmanagement.statedthatcurrentauditplanning
will be revised to shcw these criteria as not applicable.
l The established program will be used as applicable for the life of the project.
'
The M Directives, QA0 2.2 and 18.1, require orientation of an audit specialist and records of the training provided auditors.
,
There are no records of audit specialist orientation nor of any training provided. APS management committed to document all training and instructions to auditors in the future.
,
6.
Document Control
'
,
.
The control of quality related documents was examined during the review of design and procurement activities.
It was found that NS
-
.
has implemented the procedure for the control of quality related
',
documents.
The procedure for the filing system has been issued since the last inspection. The filing system appeared to meet the requirements of the procedure.
'
'
The new filing procedure does not address the safeguarding of important one-of-a-kind QA documents. The applicant stated that a procedure will incorporate the requirement of safeguarding, for the life of the plant,. documents that are considered important.
-
'
7.
Encineerinc *
.
A.
Codes and Standards
,
'
The codes, standards and guides that were readily available to the Engineer doing specification and document review were
'
examined.
The codes, standards and guides available were:
ANSI, Regulatory Guides, ASME Codes, Code of Federal Regula-
.,
tions.- The 1974 ASME Code, ACI Manual and several ASTM volumes which had been on order during the last inspection
-
had recently arrived.
,
,
8.
Specification Review
.
The specifications for the purchase of reinforcing steel, structural steel and nuclear service valves were examined.
These specifications were either out for bid or recently awarded. The document review sheets associated with these specifications were examined.
All comments generated by the
-
l Engineers and the QA Manager had been incorporated into the -
!
finished specification or had been resolved to the satisfaction of the commentor before release for bid.
'
.
.
.
.
.
- __ -
_ _ _ _ _
_ _ -. -
- - _ -.
-
. _ - _
-
.
_
~ -. -
. ~...,...,.
.
,
,
,,,.
,
'
-7-
,
,
'
No deviations from QA requirements were identified during the examination of the specification reviews.
-
'
C.
Project Procedures Manual
,
The Project Procedures Manual contains procedure NS-3,
-
" Technical Document Control." NS-3 describes the document
'
.
review process.
Each responsible engineer is required to
l maintain a " document review log". The log is used to document the step by step review process. This log had been revised since the last inspection in order to standardize its usage.
-
NS-3 was being fully implemented.
,
'
.
.
.
.
,
8.
Training
,
.
.
Examination of QA training records showed that there have been
.
i six separate QA indoctrination and project training sessions since l
January 1,1975. Additionally, there were three sessions in the l
period November-December 1974.
-
.
l
.Each demon-l During the inspection two engineers were interviewed.
l strated that they were familiar with the QA Manual and the
l, Nuclear Services project procedures manual.
~-
l
.
.
_.
.
,
9.
Construction
,
.
The construction plan provided by Bechtel was reviewed by APS
-
early in 1975.
All con =ents by APS were satisfactorily resolved.
,
The construction manual which includes the general administrative procedures for site construction is currently being reviewed.
A list of all planned construction procedures prepared by Bechtel
.
will be submitted to APS for their review in January 1976.
-
,
Procedures to control the owner's activities at the construction site were being prepared. The applicant stated that the procedures
were scheduled to be completed by the end of the year.
The QA Manager plans to hire and train a site QA engineer before the construction permit is issued.
10. Vendor Surveillance l
!
All vendor surveillance will be provided by Bechtel Corporation.
-
Compliance with the Bechtel vendor surveillance procedures will be verified by the APS OA department's audits. Audits of the vendor program will be accomplished by both direct accompaniments and record reviews.
.
e
$
p--
.-
....
-______
_ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _
., _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -. _ _ _ _.. _ _
_
_
_.
.
.
UNITED STATES
-
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REClON V SUITE 202. W ALNUT CREEK PLAZA
1999 N. CAUFORNIA 30VLEVARD WALMUT CREEK. CAUPORNI A 94596 JUL 2 41W5
.
.
Arizona Public Service Company Docket No. 50-528, 50-529 and P. O. Box 21666 50-530 Phoenix, Arizona 85036 Palo Verde 1, 2 and 3 Attention: Mr. E. E. Van Brunt, Jr.
'
Vice President, Nuclear Services Gentlemen:
This refers to the inspection conducted by Messrs. R. J. Pate and L. J. Garvin of this office on July 1-2, 1975 of quality assurance activities pertaining to your application for a construction permit for the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station and to the discussion of our findings held by Mr. R. J. Pate with Mr. Van Brunt and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
.
Are'as e'xamined during this inspection are described in the enclosed inspection report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, inter-views with personnel, and observations by the inspector. We identified no significant departures from the requirements of Appendix 8 to 10 CFR
.
50 of the NRC Regulations, " Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2 Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and
the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Docu-ment Room.
If this report contains any information that you believe
,
to be proprietary, it is necessary that you subnit a written appli-cation to this office, within twenty (20) days of the date of this letter, requesting that such information be withheld from public dis-closure. The application must include a full statement of the reasons why it is claimed that the information is proprietary. The application should be prepared so that any proprietary information identified is contained in an enclosure to the application, since the application without the enclosure will also be placed in the Public Document Room.
If we do not hear from you in this regard within the specified period,
'
the report will be placed in the Public Document Room.
- %
$!
${
f f
is sr Wo.#
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.., _,__
_.. _ _ _.
--
._.
--
___
-
-
.
.,
.
'
s, Arizona Public Service Company-2-JUL c t 1575 DN 50-528, 50-529 and 50-530 '
.
'
.
Should you have any question concerning thi inspection, we will be glad to discuss them with you.
,
,
Sincerely,
-
'
.
.
l
-
f setN
-
,
'
fR.H. ngelken
,
.
04 rector
.
.
.
.
,
Enclosure:
IE Inspection Report
'
-
Nos. 50-528, 50-529
'
-
and 50-530/7501
.
.
.
,
bec w/o enclosure:
.
.
.
~
'
.'
IE Chief l FS&EB
-
'
IE:HQ (4
,RL(4)
_
,
,
-
NNt}al Files
I
e
.
,
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
'
.
,
'
.
.
y a
4.
a e
-
.
g
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
D
.
t g
e (-
..