IR 05000528/1980010
| ML17296A966 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 08/05/1980 |
| From: | Dodds R, Vorderbrueggen NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17296A964 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-528-80-10, 50-529-80-10, 50-530-80-10, NUDOCS 8009120296 | |
| Download: ML17296A966 (12) | |
Text
Report No.
50-528/80-10 50-529/80-10 50-530/80-10 U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
Docket No.
50-528, 50-529 50-530 License No. CPPR-141-142-143 Safeguards Group Licensee:
Arizona Publi S
Phoenix, Arizona 85036 Facility Name:
Palo Verde Nuclear Generatin Station - Units
2 nd 3 Inspection at:
Palo Verd C n Inspection conducted:
Inspectors:
~
~
L. E. Vorder n, Resident Reactor Inspector g
Date Signed Date Signed roved By:
Date Signed
~jh 8e Date Signed R. T. Dodds, Chic,
ng. Support Section Reactor Const.
5 Engineering Support Branch Ins ection on June 2-27, 1980 Re ort Nos. 50-528/80-10; 50-'529/80-10, and 50-530/80-10
~Af<<d:
R i
.
di p
i b
h id i
p of construction activities including:
installation of Unit 1 essential spray pond piping, installation of Unit 2 containment spray system piping (dome spray headers),
load test of Unit 2 polar crane bridge,
'installation of Unit 2 reactor pressure vessel and steam generators, fit-up of Unit 3 containment liner sections, and general activities in progress at the site.
Additionally, the inspector observed and reviewed the investigation and repairs performed by Bechtel in response to a fire which occurred in the Unit 3 reactor pit area.
The inspection involved 66 inspector hours on-site by one NRC inspector.
Results:
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
)
RV Form 219 (2)
(
\\
~
DETAILS l.
Persons Contacted a.
Arizona Public Service Com an APS)
J.
A. Roedel, Manager, guality Assurance W.
E. Ide, Site gA Supervisor G. Pankonin, gA Engineer R.
D. Forrester, gA Engineer b.
Bechtel Power Cor oration Bechtel S.
M. Nickell, Construction Superintendent D.
R. Hawkinson, Project gA Supervisor R.
M. Grant, Project gC Engineer J. Arnold, Field Engineer-Mechanical R.
Hoke, guality Control Engineer C. Stalnaker, Unit 2 General Superintendent B.
Campo, Unit 2 Nuclear Field Engineer S. Bross, Unit 3 General Superintendent W. Miller, Unit 3 Civil Superintendent c.
Combustion En ineerin CE)
S. Mager, Site Manager d.
Reliance Truck Com an R/T)
R. Simpson, Superintendent Other persons contacted during the inspection period included construction craftsmen, inspectors and supervisory personnel.
2.
Unit'
Essential S ra Pond Pi in Installation activities associated with the 24-inch supply and return piping exterior to the pipe tunnel were observed.
" The activities involved pipe spool installation (bolted flange connections).
The pipe spools were being properly handled and supported.
The specified flange bolts were yet to be installed and torqued.
The inspector also observed the piping inside the pipe tunnels and connecting to the two essential cooling water heat exchangers.
Good workmanship was in evidence on the pipe welds and the pipe supports.
No deviations oi items of noncompliance were identifie )
~
-2-Unit 2 - Containment S ra Pi in In order to facilitate the installation of the containment dome spray piping, the horizontal sections of that piping were prefabricated and clamped into position on the underside of the dome liner segments while the completed segments were in outdoor storage awaiting placement in their intended location.
The inspector examined the piping sections that were attached to dome segments -1, 2, 4, 6, 8 and ll in the storage yard.
Also examined were piping sections resting on pallets and awaiting attachment to dome segment 12.
The spool welds making up the piping sections displayed good workman'ship.
Plastic caps were taped in place over all pipe openings, except for 3 spray nozzle openings which were covered without delay when pointed out to the unit superintendent.
No deviations or items of noncomplian'ce were identified.
Unit 2 Polar Crane Brid e Load Test The inspector observed the test liftof 860 tons (0 110/ of steam generator weight) which was performed to demonstrate th'e capability of the polar crane bridge to lift and set the main NSSS components.
The test weight was approximately 112/ of the combined weight of a steam generator and its associated rigging equipment.
The test load was 1'ifted, traversed the path to be taken by steam, generator No. 2, and returned to the pick-up point.
The deflection of both girders of the crane bridge was measured at the predesignated trolley locations.
The Bechtel Construction Inspection Plan (WPP/gCI No. 350.84) which recorded the deflection data and the completion of the procedural steps was subsequently examined and found to be in order.
The maximum bridge deflection (at centerspan)
was seen to be within the allowable limit of 2.35-inches established by the crane manufacturer (Whiting Co.).
The deflection data also showed that the bridge girders returned to within 3/32-inch and 7/32-i'nch of the original condition when the test load was removed.
This residual
"set" is considered to be the accumulated creepage associated with the components involved in the girder/support structure combination, rather than any plastic deformation of the crane girders.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identifie Unit 2 - Reactor Vessel Installation The activities associated with the installation of the reactor vessel were observed by the inspector.
The rigging transport and handling of the vessel was performed by Reliance Truck Co. in accordance with the written procedure which had the prior approval of Bechtel.
(Procedure No.
109, Rev.
2, Transporting From Storage and Erecting-Reactor Pressure Vessel).
The placement of the vessel on its support columns was done in accordance with Bechtel Construction Inspection Plan WPP/gCI No. 350.54-2.
The governing specification was Combustion Engineering Inc.
No.
SYSBO-PE-IR10, System Interface Requirements for Reactor Cooling System - Standard System 80.
Difficulties were encountered when attempts were made to remove the four 3 1/2-inch diameter bolts used to clamp the shipping/upender skid to vessel support pad No.
1A.
Three of the bolts were
"locked" in the threaded support pad due to galling of the threads.
The decision was made to flame-cut the three bolts in order to remove the skid from the vessel.
Subsequent efforts were not successful in removing the bolt stubs
.and CE management was called upon to resolve the problem.
Their d'ecision was to leave the bolt stubs in place (they would fit into holes in the mating support column); their calculations showed that the remaining ll - 3 1/2-inch hold-down studs were adequate to handle all anticipated loads.
The vessel was subsequently set in position on its four support columns with no further difficulties.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
Unit 2 - Steam Generator Installation The inspector observed the activities involved with the installation of both steam generators.
Reliance Truck Co. performed all rigging, transport and handling of the generators.
Their written procedure (No. 108, Rev. 2, Transporting From Storage and Erecting - Steam Generators)
was verified as having prior approval of Bechtel.
The placement of each generator on its sliding base was done in accordance with Bechtel Construction Plan WPP/gCI No. 350.36-2.
The governing specification was Combustion Engineering Inc.
No. SYSBO-PE-IR10, System Interface Requirements for Reactor Coolant System - Standard System 80.
No difficulties of significance were encountered during the setting of either steam generator.
When the shipping covers were removed from the support skirt of each generator, however, numerous nicks, gouges and arc-strikes were found.
The generators were apparently
I (
shipped from the factory in this condition.
Bechtel documented the defects on nonconformance reports N-C-129 and N-C-132, and effected repairs by procedures approved by Combustion Engineering and performed dye penetrant examinations as required.
The NDE results were also documented.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
Unit 3 - Containment Liner Fitu The inspector examined the fitup seams formed by vertical liner segments for containment ring No.
had been tack-welded in position.
The governing No. 13-CN-370, Erecting the Containment. Building the placement of the 4.
The segments specification is Liner Plate System.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
Unit 3 - Fire In Reactor Pit On June 26, 1980, fire destroyed the wooden framework that had been constructed to support the concrete forms for the reactor pit in the bottom of the'ontainment building.
The fire was discovered at approximately 4:30 p.m.,
one hour after all Unit 3 workmen had departed for the day.
The licensee's investigation concluded that nearby welding activities involved with form placement and/or reinforcing steel installation was the probable cause.
There appeared to be no indication of arson or sabotage.
Following the removal of the charred framework, a comprehensive examination was performed by Bechtel.
A small. hole, varying from 2 to 3 feet in diameter, was burned through the bottom of the wooden concrete form at azimuth 220-degrees (approximately).
There appeared to be no damage to the adjacent reinforcing steel or to the nearest anchor bolts for the reactor vessel support columns located about two feet away from the burned area.
Some minor surface cracking of the concrete floor was found in the same vicinity.
The area involved was power-hammered back to sound concrete and was repaired during the subsequent concrete placement.
Plant Tours The construction site was toured several times during this reporting period to observe general housekeeping conditions, care and preservation of equipment, and general adherence to the requirements of the quality assurance program.
Particular attention was given to work in progress, adequacy of desiccants in use, presence of covers over equipment and caps over pipe openings, and proper storage of valves and pipe spools on dunnage.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identifie i
10.
Mana ement Meetin s
On June 13 and 27, 1980, the inspector met with senior licensee personnel to summarize the scope of his inspection activities and the findings as described in this repor <J k
l 4j 4i