IR 05000528/1981006
| ML17297A539 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 06/10/1981 |
| From: | Burdoin J, Eckhardt J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17297A537 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-528-81-06, 50-528-81-6, 50-529-81-06, 50-529-81-6, 50-530-81-06, 50-530-81-6, NUDOCS 8107010424 | |
| Download: ML17297A539 (10) | |
Text
50-528/81-06 50-529/81-06 Report No.
50-530/81-06 U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEHENT REGION V
Docket No.
50-528, 50-529, 50-530 License No.
CPPR-141,
-142, -143 Safeguards Group Licensee:
Facility Name:
Inspection at:
Arizona Public Service Company P.
0.
Box 21666 Phoenix, Arizona 85036 Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station - Units 1, 2 and
Palo Verde Construction Site, Wintersburg, Arizona Inspection conducted:
April 28 - May,1, 1981 Inspectors
.
H. Eckhardt, Reactor Inspector J
.
Bu doin, Reactor Inspector
Po./
ate Signed C lojgj Date Signed Approved by:
Summa':
. Eckhardt, Acting Chief, Reactor Projects ir Section
D te Signed-Inspection on April 28-Ma 1,
1981 Re ort Hos.
50-528/81-06, 50-529/81-06, and 50-530/81-06
~A<<:
i, di p
i b
n
di p
of activities relating to welder qualification testing, post weld heat treatment, concrete placement, tendon button heading, and Unit 2 control building sump.
The inspection involved 44 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspectors.
Results:
No items of noncompliance were identified.
RV Form 219 (2)
~,
~
~
DETAILS 1.
Individuals Contacted a.
Arizona Public Service Com an APS
- E.
E.
Van Brunt, Jr., Vice President, Nuclear Projects Management
- J. A. Roedel, guality Assurance Manager
- D. B. Fasnacht, Site Construction Manager
- W. E. Ide, Site gA Supervisor G. Pankonin, gA. Engineer R.
D. Forrester, gA Engineer L. Souza, gA Engineer D.
E. Fowler, gA Engineer R. J.
Kimmel, Field Engineering Supervisor D. Wittas, gA Engineer b.
Bechtel Power Cor oration Bechtel W. J. Stubblefield, Field Construction Manager
- R.
M. Grant, Project gC Supervisor
- D.
R.
Hawkinson, Project gA Supervisor
'S.
M. Nickell, Project Superintendent A.
K. Priest, Project Field Engineer J. Black, Resident Engineer S. Jain, Engineer D. Haavik, Engineer c.
Western Stress S. Bell, Superintendent d.
Western Concrete Structures, Inc.
WCS K. Jacobsen, gA/gC Manager e.
Consultant J.
C. King,'onsulting Engineer
- Denotes those attending exit meeting.
2.
Welder qualification Testin lhe inspector reviewed the on-site welder qualification program to ascertain compliance with Bechtel procedures.
Three welders were observed in the testing booths, two performing piping welds and one performing a plate weld.
Radiographs of five recently completed test welds were read, and the inspector agreed with the interpretations
of the original Bechtel reader.
In addition, the qualification testing records for five welders involved in welds examined during previous NRC inspections were reviewed to ascertain that the welders were in fact qualified for the particular welding process involved.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Post Weld Heat Treatment The piping post weld heat treatment (PWHT) program was examined to ascertain compliance with MPP/gCI-'103.0,
"Post Meld Heat Treatment Control".
The PWHT records, including construction inspection plan (CIP) records for PWHT and the heat treatment strip charts, for the following Unit 2 welds were reviewed:
Weld M001 on NSSS 30 inch pipe spool 2-RC-033 Weld WOOl on NSSS 30 inch pipe-spool 2-RC-084 The soak temperatures and times and 'the heatup rates indicated on the strip char ts were as specified on the CIP.
These temperatures and times were found to be in accordance with ASHE Code requir ements.
The in-process PWHT of the following Unit 2 welds was examined:
Weld W016 on 6 inch pipe spool SGE-039.
Weld W003 on 6 inch pipe spool SGE-052.
The examination included thermocouple attachment, insulation installation, and strip chart recorder operation.
The CIPs for these welds were reviewed and the soak temperatures and times were as specified in the ASME Code.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
4.
Concrete Placement - Unit 2 S ra Pond The inspectors observed a portion of the concrete placement of Unit 2 spray pond pump house walls (Pour No.
2Y132 of 450 cubic yards).
Particular attributes checked included availability of adequate crafts and inspection personnel, concrete drop height, lateral displacement, reinforcing bar cover, and concrete vibration.
The inspectors observed the taking of concrete samples for slump tests and break strength tests.
Also, the operation at the batch p'lant was observed.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie ~
~
-3-Containment Tendon Button Headin
- Unit I The button heading of Unit I containment tendon number H21-034 at buttress I was observed to ascertain compliance with the MCS procedures.
The inspector observed proper cleaning of each wire prior to button heading, the actual button heading operation, and gC inspection and measurement of the button heads as required.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
Unit 2 Control Buildin Sum
-" 50.55 e
Item On April 15, 1981, the licensee submitted an interim 50. 55(e)
report concerning a concrete void in the base mat of the Unit 2 control building.
The void is located adjacent to a four foot deep sump at elevation 74'-0",
and was discovered after water was observed seeping into the sump from its west wall.
The concrete on the surface of the sump wall was then removed by chipping to reveal the void.
To determine the size and extent of the void, the area was core drilled and examined with a borescope.
The location of the core drilling was chosen so as not to compromise the structural aspects of reinforcing steel design.
The void, located immediately west of the sump, was mapped and determined to be approximately four cubic yards in volume and located at a depth of 33 to 43 inches below the floor level.
It was also determined that this void came in contact with the south wall of the sump.
During the core drilling three considerably smaller voids were discovered, each of which was
. not more than a few cubic feet in volume.
The larger of these voids is located south of the sump and approximately seven to nine inches below floor level.
The licensee engaged a consultant engineer for an independent opinion as to the proper corrective measure to be employed in filling the concrete void.
To correct this deficiency, the chipped-out portions of.the south and west sump walls will be faced with expanded metal (heavy metal mesh)
and backed with form lumber.
Grout will be introduced through selected core drilled'oles under 15-20 psig pressure while venting of the void will be through other core drilled holes.
The consultant engineer recommended drilling three additional holes at selected locations to aid in venting during grouting.
The process will be monitored with a borescope to assure complete filling of the void.
It has been concluded that the void was caused by inadequate vibration of the concrete under multiple layers (five) o'f reinforcing steel
~
~
~
immediately above the void.
The additional layers of reinforcing steel near the sump were required because the four foot thick base mat changes elevation when passing under the sump.
Additional core drilling was conducted by the licensee to determine if similar voids existed in the areas of two other sumps located in the Unit 2 control building base mat.
No voids were discovered in these areas.
The licensee reviewed records to determine if a similar problem could possibly exist in the Unit 3. control building base mat.
This review revealed that the concrete under the sumps in the Unit 1 control building base mat had been placed separately from the remainder of the base mat, whereas for Unit 2 the entire base mat was one placement.
Because the Unit '1 concrete under the sumps was placed separately from the remainder, the licensee concluded that void problems do not exist in Unit l.
To preclude developing similar void problems during the placement of the Unit 3 control building base mat, the design of reinforcing steel has been modified to assure good flow of concrete in the areas of the sumps.
This item will remain open pending the licensee's submittal of a final 50.55(e) report and satisfactory repair of the identified voids.
On May 1, 1981, the inspectors met with the licensee representatives identified in paragraph 1 and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection as discussed in this repor I I
I