IR 05000528/1979010
| ML17296A695 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 01/30/1980 |
| From: | Dodds R, Vorderbrueggen NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17296A694 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-528-79-10, 50-529-79-10, 50-530-79-06, NUDOCS 8004300121 | |
| Download: ML17296A695 (12) | |
Text
50-528/79-10 50-529/79-10 Report No.50 530/79"06 Docket No.50-528 50-529 50-5 U ~ S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
License,No.
CPPR-141 CPPR-142 Safeguards Group CPP~-i/3 Licensee:
Arizona Public Service Com an P. 0.
Box 21666 Phoeni Facility Name:
P Inspection at:
Palo Verde Construction Site l/intersbur Arizona Inspection conducted:
November 1-30 1979 and
Inspectors:
~
~
L.
. Vorderbrueggen esident Reactor Inspector Da Signed Date Signed Date Signed fLQ roved By:
.
Do s,
C ief, Eng. Support Section Date Signed Reactor Const.
8 Engineering Support Branch Summary:-
Ins ection on November'1-30; 1979'(Re ort'Nos.
50-528 79-'10;'50-'529/79-'10 50-530/79-06
.
~dd:
It l, d
d l
f by the resident inspector including; in Uni.t 1, pipe hanger welds, reactor coolant system post-weld heat treatment, spray pond pump structure reinforcing steel, polar crane support brackets, reactor internals shippi'ng damage; reinforcing steel in Unit 2 diesel generator foundations; in Unit 3, safety injection system pipe welding, tendon gallery trumplate installation; and, miscellaneous work in progress throughout the plant.
The inspection involved 38 inspector hours on-site by one NRC inspector.
Results:
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identified during the inspection period.
d RV Form 219 (2)
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted a.
Arizona Public Service Com an
- J. A. Roedel, Manager, guality Assurance
- L. W. Price, Site Construction Manager K. D. Forrester, guality Assurance Engineer N.
E. Wibel, guality Assurance Engineer
- G. E. Pankonin, guality Assurance Engineer
- D. B. Fasnacht, Field Engineering Super visor b.
Bechtel Power Cor oration S. Nickell, Project Superintendent
- H. Claxton, Project Superintendent
- A. D. Priest, Project Field Engineer
- D. W. Hawkinson, Project guality Assurance Supervisor
- C. E. Gaither, Assistant Project Field Engineer
- R. M. Grant, Project guality Control Engineer A. Becker, Field Engineer, Civil J.
L. Black, Resident Engineer N. Stevenson, Welding Engineer J.
Donaldson, Field Welding Engineer c.
Combustion En ineerin
, Inc.
S. Mager, Site Manager
- Denotes these attending management interview.
2.
Unit 1 Pi e
Han er Welds The inspector reviewed the findings of Bechtel audit No. UA-79-S-35 of Unit 1 pipe supports, conducted on June 28-29, 1979.
Also reviewed was the CAR (Corrective Action Request),
which was issued as a result of the adverse audit findings related to welding inadequacies.
The identified corrective action appeared to be adequate to remedy the situation.
Following a discussion'ith the licensee, the inspector was informed that the matter was being evalu-ated for 50.55(e) reportability significan'c l
3.
PWHT on Unit 1 Reactor Coolant S stem The activities associated with post-weld heat treatment of the main coolant piping were examined.
Heat treatment of the two reactor vessel hot leg nozzle welds (RC-032 and RC-063)
was in progress.
The temperature traces were observed to be adequately shown on the strip chart recorders.
The assigned field welding engineer was present at the temperature control station and appeared to be in effective charge of the operation.
No deviations from the governing document (WPP/gCI 103.0) were identified by the inspector
.
The inspector also examined'he documentation packages pertaining to the first three welds that were heat treated by the PWHT contractor.
These were:
o Weld W001 on line RC-033 --- Steam Generator No.
1 outlet nozzle in Pump No.
1A suction line.
o Weld W001 on line RC-034 --- Pump No.
1A discharge nozzle in cold leg return to Reactor Vessel.
o Weld W002 on line RC-034 --- Reactor Vessel cold leg inlet nozzle in discharge line from Pump No.
1A.
The temperature recorder charts were observed to be properly labled and marked to show the specified rise, soak, and cool-down rates and times, and the CIP's appeared to be properly completed.
Additionally, the inspector reviewed several items of correspondence in the Lead Field Welding fngineer's files.
These demonstrated an active participation by Bechtel home office metallurgical specialists in such topics as procedure development, heater type selection and placement, thermocouple location, etc.
The inspector concluded that the PWHT program was being performed satisfactorily and was under adequate control.
4.
Unit
S ra Pond Pum Structure Reinforcing steel installation and concrete form placement for the lower portion (fl. 94-ft. to 108-ft.) of the spray pond pump structure were examined.
The governing drawings were 13-C-SPS-376 through -378, inclusive.
The governing specifications were 13-CM-375, Placing of Reinforcing Steel, and 13-CM-365, Forming, Placing, Finishing and Curing of Concrete.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie Unit 1 Polar Crane Su ort Brackets During the installation of the brackets which support the chord beams for the containment building polar crane, it was found that minor modifications were required.
These consisted of trimming gussets to eliminate interference with wall reinforcing steel, addition of construction aids and enlarging holes for the attachment of stif-finers. Consequently, it was decided to similarly modify the support brackets for Unit 2.
However, during these modifications it was discovered that the brackets had discontinuities at the roots of the welds.
Subsequent examinations confirmed that the prevalent problem was lack of penetration, even though the design drawings had specified full-penetration welds.
This discovery cast uncertainty on the adequacy of the already installed brackets in Unit l.
Therefore, the licensee initiated an evaluation and considered the 50.55(e)
reportabi lity aspects of the situation.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's Deficiency Evaluation Report (No. 79-7)
and the supporting documents.
Based on satisfactory testing of five Unit 3 brackets, known from visual and UT examination
.to have typical (and severe)
defects, under cyclical loading conditions and on one bracket with loads approaching the material yield strength values, the licensee concluded that the discrepant brackets were acceptable
"as-is".
The margin of safety against yield was determined to be greater than 2.3 when loaded with the construction test load for steam generator installation (the heaviest load that will ever be placed on the polar crane bridge).
The inspector had no further questions on this matter.
Unit 1 Reactor Internals Shi in Dama e
The reactor internals
"package" experienced minor damage from an undetermined cause during railroad shipment.
According to the Combustion Engineering Site Manager, he participated in a preliminary inspection of the equipment while it was still on a railroad car at the Cashion, Arizona siding (Phoenix western outskirts),
immediately after the damage was reported.
He stated that the keyway region of the core barrel flange appeared to have been bumped and there was evidence of some slight metal upset which, he was confident, was inconsequential.
When the item arrived at the jobsite it was lifted from the rail car and set down on dunnage for temporary storage.
Detailed examination with greater precision will be performed after the equipment is taken into the containment building and uncrate Unit 2 Diesel Generator Foundations The inspector examined the installation of reinforcing steel in the supporting foundations for the two diesel generators.
The bar was noted to be No.
6 and No.
9 size as specified on Dwg. 13-C-ZGS-110, and the workmen were working with the current issue (Rev. 4) of that drawing.
The governing specification was 13-CN-375, Placing of Reinforcing Steel.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Unit 3 Safet
- Injection S stem Pi in Safety injection system piping installation in the basement of the auxiliary building was examined.
At the time, welder No.
P242 was tack welding spool No.
001 of line B-031-GCBC-10 inch to the nozzle provided in spool No.
009 line B-308-GCBC-24 inch.
The applicable drawing was No. 13-P-SIF-202, and the procedure specified on the Field Welding Check List (WR-5) was P8-AT-AG.
The welder was using the specified bare filler rod (ER-308 L).
The WR-5 was noted to be properly filled out with hold points identified.
The filler metal issue slip was examined and appeared to be in order.
The welder's qualification record was subsequently examined and found acceptable.
The workmanship appeared to be satisfactory and in accordance with the requirements.
After the workmen had departed from the area for that day, the inspector found three openings in that same system which had been left uncapped, contrary to the requirements of Section 9.5, Erection Cleanliness, of Specification 13-PM-204, Field Fabrication and Installation of Nuclear Piping Systems.
This item of noncompliance is included in the report of the inspection performed by Region 5 inspectors at this same time, and who also observed uncovered pipe openings in other areas of the plant.
Unit 3 Tendon Galler Trum late Installation On several occasions the inspector examined vertical trumplate instal-lation in the ceiling structure of the tendon gallery.
The installation appeared to be in accordance with the requirements specified in Dwg. 13-C-ZCS-182, Prestressing Requirements
- Sections and Details, Sheet 1.
The governing specification was 13-CH-371, Installation Specification for Post-Tensioning Trumplate Assemblies and Sheathing, and the applicable WPP/RCI was No. 660, Post-Tensioning Trumplate Sheathing Installation and Inspection.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identifie '
g P
10.
Plant Tours The inspector toured the construction site several times each week during the inspection report period.
Particular attention was given to work in progress, presence of supervision and quality control inspectors at the work areas, care and preservation of equip-ment, and general housekeeping practices.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified during the plant tours.
ll.
Mana ement Interview
The inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in para-graph
on November 20 and 30, 1979.
The scope of the inspections and the inspection findings as noted in this report were discussed.
The licensee representatives made no significant comments.
'
I f