IR 05000528/1981015
| ML17297B158 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 12/04/1981 |
| From: | Bishop T, Vorderbrueggen NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17297B157 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-528-81-15, 50-529-81-12, 50-530-81-12, NUDOCS 8201130167 | |
| Download: ML17297B158 (20) | |
Text
U. S UCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFIC OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT R
rt No.
Docket No.
Licensee:
50-528/81-15 50-529/81-12 50-530/81-12 REGION V
50-528, 50-529 s
License No P
R 141
'Safeguards Group 5Arizona Public Service Company P'.
0.
Box 21666 Phoenix, Arizona 85036 Facility Name; Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Units 1, 2,
and
Inspection at; Palo Verde Construction Site, Wintersburg, Arizona Inspection cond cted:
August
September 4,
1981 Inspectors:
I.u.
i'
L. E.
Vor er r egg Senior Resident Inspector l2.- -
I Date Signed Date Signed Aved By:
l.iJ
~ ~
T.
W. Bis co z,e Reactor Projects Section
Date Signed iz-0-Date Signed Summary:
Ins ection on Au ust
Se tember
1981 (Re ort Nos.
50-528/
81-15 50-529/81-12 and 50-530/81-12)
Areas Ins ected:
Rou'tine, unannounced inspection by the resident inspector of construction.activities associated with containment electrical penetrations; Unit 1 containment post-tensioning; in-strumentation components; protection of installed reactor vessels Units 1 and 2; reactor vessel internals Units 1 and 2; reactor coolant pressure boundary and other safety related piping; safety related pipe supports; electrical cables; Unit 3 containment structure; main coolant pump lateral supports; care and preser-vation of equipment; follow-up of licensee action on previous inspection. findings; and general activities in progress at the plant site.
The'inspection involved 74 inspector-hours on-site by one NRC inspector.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
P 8201, 130k'h7 '1'1
Ry Form 219 (2)
"J'
hKP".t"4)"
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted a.
Arizona Public Service Com an (APS)
>>E.
E.
Van Brunt, Jr.,
Vice President, Nuclear Projects Management
>>J.
A. Roedel, Corporate Quality Assurance Manager
>>D.
B. Fasnacht, Site Construction Manager
>>W.
E. Ide, Site QA Supervisor
- R. J.
Kimmel, Field Engineering Supervisor G. Pankonin, QA Engineer R. Forrester, QA Engineer L. Souza, QA Engineer
- D. E.Fowler, QA Engineer
- C. N. Russo, Operations QA Manager
- J.
C. Solakiewicz, Operations QA Engineer b.
Bechtel Power Cor oration Bechtel 2.
>>S.
M. Nickell, Project Superintendent
>>A. K. Priest, Project; Field, Engineer
>>D.
R. Hawkinson, tProj e'ct QA,Supervisor
- R. M. Grant, Project QC Engineer
>>M. A. Rosen, QC Engineer A. Robertson, QC Engineer R. Robinson, Pipe Hanger Engineer-Unit
c.
Western Goner'ete Structrues Inc.',
l )j
')
K. Guffey, Site.Superint'endent T. Hick, QC Engineer i1 Other persons cont'acted'uring the i'nspection period included construction crafts@en',inspectors'.,and supervisory personnel.
>>Management gee't'ing.'ttendees'.
Licensee Action on.,Pievious Ins ecti'on Findin s
r An inspectio'n was,made
'of licensee actions"-pertaining to the following i.t'ems: >>
a.
(Closed)
Follow-u Item (50-528/79-11/01):
Steam Generator Shim Movement This item was held in an open status pending completion of the licensee's review for 50.55(e) reportability.
That review is documented on Deficiency Evaluation Report (DER)
It ttt I
I t
It I
b.
c
~
I i
-2-fi ff.
\\
i
1 If ff
I I
I I
No. 79-'l. dated,,-August
~17, "1979.
"ffThe licensee concluded that the topic,was not reportable.,
This item 'is considered i
closed."
i (Closed 'ollow-u I
tern (50-'529/80-02/02 and 50-529/80-14/01):
Ed e Curvatu're Distortio'nf o'n fContainment Dome Liner Se ments I
'I Inspection activit'y on this item was addressed in paragraph
of I/E.,Inspection report 5'0-529/80-'17 dated November 21, 1980.
This item is, closed.
(0 en Noncom liance
"Item 50-529/81-05/01):
Welder's Identi-fication S mbol Missin Prom Weld The licensee representatives were informed that their response to this item of noncompliance as described in their letter dated July 8, 1981 was considered to be incomplete.
This is because the reindoctrination program on welder symbol application requirements was not given to the Units 1 and
Pipefitter Welders.
This item will remain open.
Containment Electrical Penetrations Units 1,
and
During a tour of the facility, the inspector observed that the pressure gages on several installed penetrations were not indicat-ing a positive pressure..
Subsequent discussion with licensee personnel disclosed that the subject of maintaining continuous nitrogen pressure on the penetration seals had been identified as an audit finding and was documented on Quality Assurance Finding (QAF) No.
SF-81-14 and SF-81-15, both dated April 8, 1981.
These QAD's were issued because existing maintenance practices were not in accordance with,the seal pressurization provisions in the manufacturer's (Conax Company) instruction manual.
Both QAF'.s and their'supporting documentation, along with the Conax instruction manual were reviewed by the in-spector.
The issue-appears to focus on vagueness of the Conax manual in regard to the necessity for pressurization after penetration installation.
The documentation package included Bechtel correspondence with Conax requesting clari-fication of the matter.
The inspector concluded that the licensee's actions were prop'erly addressing this situation.
Each penetration assembly is,fitted with a small valve called an integration valve.
Its function is to,isolate the pressuri-zation system from the area between the two "0" ring grooves which provide the penetration/building seal when the assembly is in-stalled.
This permits the assembly to maintain an internal
1t C 2~'P J
I'
I l
JJ t
Pl l
V I
kf
-3 E
II positive pressure during shipment and storage prior to installa-tion.
A leak test is required-'on each penetration assembly upon completion of installation.""-For this leak test, the in-tegration valve must be opened=in order to verify the adequacy of the "0" ring seals.
The inspector checked the position of the integration valve on several penetrations at the 120 foot-level in Units 1 and 2.
Of the sixteen (16) valves 'checked in Unit 1, two (2) were found in the closed position.
Of the eight (8)
valves checked in Unit 2, one (1)
was tightly closed and two (2)
could not be confirmed as being open.
The normal procedure is to leave the integration valve open after the leak test; however, since installation inspection checklist does not require a sign-
"off for valve position during pressurization, the actual position during leak testing appears uncertain.
Since there may be, various reasons for closing the valves some time subsequent to the leak
,test, the inspector concluded that finding certain valves closed did not necessarily indicate failure to follow test procedures.
The lack of specificity in-the checklist was identified to the licensee.
This matter will remain open pending resolution of the pressurization matters with the Conax Corporation (50-528/81-15/01).
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Containment Post-Tensionin -'nit 1 Tensioning of vertical tendon No.'-51 in the tendon gallery was observed to ascertain compliance with MCS procedures PTP-8 and QCP-6.
The tendon traverses over the containment dome from gallery azimuths 139 and 331 degrees.
Although hampered by hy-draulic equipment difficulties, the tensioning crews managed to complete the operation satisfactorily.
Communications between the two tensioning crews was adequate.
The measured elongation at the specified 80 degrees of ultimate tendon strength was within the tolerance range (5 percent)
of the calculated value.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Instrumentation Com onents Unit
The installation of components associated with the plant protec-tion functions listed below were selected for examination to verify compliance with requirements:
I Functions Protection Channel Instrument Rack Pressurizer Pressure Pressurizer Pressure Steam Generator 81 Pressure Steam Generator
//1 Level ',
0.
I J
y
~
$
Ey'
(F
SBA-A01 B
'SBA-A01 C
.--
. E,j.>>
. SBC-A03 D
g-",,>>
.p~~, 'BD-A03 y
I
c I
I II
- 'f I
ICl,
)
I I
~I)l 8 )
LCI ri
U f'l t
.I i
'*
il
ff a
C
.N,l
~ I C
f'J p,
I'
Work had proce'eded-only to the extent th'at the instrument mounting racks had been inst'alled; no transmit'ters had yet been mounted and the sensing lines were in the very early stage of installation.
The governing documents we'e Specification 13-JM-702, Drawing 13-J-ZCF-004, and WPP/QCI 302.0.
The inspector noted that several of the work platforms had accumulations of dirt and trash; this was identified to the licensee and prompt remedial action was initiated.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Protection of Installed Reactor Vessels (Units 1 and 2)
Guarded access control to the Unit 1 reactor pool area continues to limit the entry of personnel, equipment, tools and materials to only those'uthorized.
Work continued on the installation of the cooling equipment for the control element drive mechanisms (CEDM) and the vessel head was kept in place to prevent the entry of dirt or foreign objects.
The inspector observed generally poor housekeeping practices in the work areas surrounding the CEDM cooling equipment.
Since the refueling pool area is directly below this equipment and is susceptible to falling debris and dirt, this condition was made known to the licensee and action was promptly taken to correct the situation.
The Unit 2 reactor vessel has a heavy structural cover across the vessel flange to keep out foreign objects and debris.
The work platforms and ladders inside the vessel are metallic or made of treated wood to minimize fire hazards.
The inspector verified that the procedures for protection of the installed reactor vessels were being implemented.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Reactor Vessel Internals
. Units 1 and
For Unit 1, work continued on the installation of the vibration monitoring instrumentation on the internals components in the refueling pool area.
The components are kept fully draped with heavy plastic sheeting to prevent the entry of dust and debris.
Clean room type procedures are followed when work is being per-formed.
]4 The Unit 2 vessel internal components remained in storage in the refueling pool storage areas.
The inspector verifi,ed that the protective covers for,'h'e components were in place.
It appeared to the inspector that the procedures for protection of the vessel internals were being followed.
[
//
I I
'1l il
II
't
\\
I I
,S I
I r
I
,-I II I
lr I
I'k I
I,I
p, I
'1 1
, I I
E.
l'
ll
'I
~I O
'I I
1, +'l'
I fi I
I I
I'1 I I
'I (
I 5 No items of noncompliance or dev 8.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundar I
II r '
iation'swe'e id'entified.
and Saf et Related Pi in Installation ill a.
Com onent Ins talla tion Activities, Various work.activities associated with handling and in-stallation of piping components in the Unit 2 containment building and spray pond were observed to ascertain compliance with specification 13-PM-204, the ASME code, and PSAR require-ments.
The systems involved wer'e the safety injection piping from tank lB, and the stainless steel piping in the spray pond.
Particular attention was given to the handling and supporting of system components, correctness of configuration, contr'ol of welding records in, the work area, use of specified materials, control of weld filler metal, absence of defects on component surfaces, and inspection performance by qualified personnel.
b.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
In-Process Weldin Activities Two welds in the Unit 2 systems identified above were ex-amined to ascertain compliance with the requirements of specification 13-PM-204, the ASME code (Section III-1974 edition)
and Bechtel installation/inspection procedures WPP/QCI 100.0, 101.0 and 202.0.
The welds were:
(1)
Weld W-002 joining spool S-001 to motor operated valve UV-644 in 14-inch outlet (line SI-E-223)
from safety injection tank 1B.
(2)
Weld W-007 joining spools 8-006 and S-007 in 14-inch spray pond header SP-B-022.
For weld No. 1, the applicable drawing was 13-P-SIF-103 and the welding procedure specification was P8-AT-AG(4).
The inspector observed the fitup, tack-welding and approximately half of the root-pass.
Workmanship was very good.
For weld No.
2, the applicable drawing was 13-P-ZYA-062 and the welding proce'dure specification was P8-T-AG(2).
Several weld layers had been deposited and the workmanship appeared very good.
For both welds, a properly filled out'Field Welding Check List (WR-5 form)
was present at the work location, and the
~
.
J T
t I
h I
A a II I
I E
I I
I, g w
I
~
)
II I
c
~
-6-welding machine settings of current and ivoltage were seen to be within the specified ranges.
Filler metal issue records (WR-6 Form) which identified the welders were also present.
The WR-5 Forms identified the weld number, the system, and the applicable drawing number.
Also specified were the welding procedure to be used, the material specification and filler metal to be used, preheat and interpass temperatures, and NDE requirements.
The inspector verified that the WR-5 provisions were in accordance with the requirements of the ASME Code,Section III, 1974 edition.
The qualification records of the welders involved were examined and found to be acceptable.
The inspector observed that quality control inspection and supervisory surveillance were being performed to an appropriate degree.
The inspector also observed fit-'p efforts on spools, S-001 and S-002 for we3,d W-002 in the
'same 14-inch spray header SP-B-02 Difficulty was (encountered because one of the spool ends. was oval-shaped causing a misalignment considerably in excess of the 3/32-inch allowed',by the ASME Code and the Bechtel General -Qelding Standard."
The craftsmen were using a heavy,",chain-type'l'amp to "squeeze" the oval-shaped pipe end into,position to satisfy the 3/32-",inch allowance for welding.
This appeared to the inspector to be a.form of cold-working,and it, was not,apparent that controls had been established, or,', t'hat,,guidance for the field piping engineers had been 'provided,'by Becht'el engineering in the installation specification for a situ'ation of th'is nature.
This matter was discussed: w'ith the 1'icensee.
"This item is considered unreso'lved'ending engineering cia'rification (Unresolved item No. 50-529(81-12-01).
C
~
No items of noncompliance or deviation were identified.
Postweld Stress Relievin Unit
Stress relieving operation',)
on Weld W-003 in reactor cooling system line RC-073 was examined for compliance with approved contract spe'cifications, procedure and code requirements.
The weld being heat treated joins spools S-002 and S-003 in coolant pump No.
2A suction line from steam generator No.
2.
Eight thermocouples (T/C) had been attached to the pipe ar'ound the circumference of the weld, and all T/C's were observed to be properly reading on the temperature re-corder.
The calibration of the recorder was verified to be current.
At the time of the inspection the weld'was approxi-mately 45-minutes into the specified 2 1/2-hour soaking time at 1150-degrees F.
The manually-recorded temperature data on the subcontractor's log "showed that the rate of temperature rise above 800-degrees F. did not exceed the specified max-imum of 110-degrees F. per hour.
It was later verified that
I II
'J I
<<I'
I 4'
JI II I
- JI I
- )i)
<<
II I
JI
,II" I
,A
'I, I'
I I
I J
~
I'I'J I,
'
I I
I '
I
'I J
'
P'n JI'f I
If I
J If If V
j'-f"
the holding time and cool down rate were within the specified time limits".-
The heat treatment and associated inspection were performed in accordance with procedures PHT-501 and WPP/QCI-103.0.
I No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Safet Related Pi e
Su orts Spring hanger No.
2 supporting spool S-001 in 24-inch main feed-water line 2-SGE-205 in the Unit 2 main steam support structure was previously examined while it was being installed (IE Report 50-529/81-05).
The hanger was not completed at that time because of an ambiguity on the drawing in regard to the stiffener gusset p'lates on the main horizontal member.
During a walk-through of this area the inspector noticed that the hanger had not yet been completed, so an inquiry was made of its current status.
The hanger document
"package" in the custody of the hanger engineer was in the active file and contained an approved FCR which clarified the gusseting requirements.
One discrepancy was apparent, however, in that also present in the package was the hanger drawing with a stamp indicating that the work was complete.
It could not be determined who had affixed the completion stamp or why it had not been voided.
This item was reviewed with licensee representa-tives.
Since the package was still in an active status, and the FCR requires a documented QC inspection fox its closure, the inspector concluded that the situation was under adequate control.
However, the proper completion of this hanger will be verified by the inspector (follow-up item No. 50-529/81-12/02).
No items of noncompliance or devieations were identified.
Electrical Cable Installation The pulling of five-500 MCM power feeder cables in the Unit
Auxiliary Building was observed by the inspector to ascertain compliance with specification 13-EM-301 and WPP/MCI 254.0 require-ments.
The cables were labeled SB01NC2FB and run in conduit, A2DNRF62 between generator control panel SFN-C02B and circuit breaker cubicle SBB-C03.
The cables provide power for control element drive mechanism groups B and D.
A tugger and currently calibrated torque indicator were used to pull the cables.
The cable pull card was properly filled out and signed off, and showed the calculated maximum allowable'pulling force to be 5290 pounds.
During the pull, the inspector observed the torque indicator and noted that the highest indication was 1500 foot-pounds which was
,equivalent to a pulling force on the cables of approximately 3000 pounds.
The quality control inspector was present throughout the installation.
The cxaftsfmen exercised appropriate caxe to protect the cable insulation and'ere under adequate supervision.
I IJ It I
'
I "'I j
r I
I ll 1Ii t)
Il
I ~-
I II I I I
\\
'
I i
I rl
~
~
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Unit 3 Containment Structure Installation of reinforcing steel and tendon sheathing for place-ment 3C110, Elevation 176 to 186-feet, was examined.
The bar size,.grade and spacing were observed to be as specified, and the bars were free of scale or other surface materials that would interfere with concrete bonding.
Tendon sheaths that had been put in place were clean, free of damage, and securely fastened to the reinforcing steel.
Sheath splices and the junctions of the sheaths with the buttress trumpet extensions were taped sufficiently to prevent the entrance of mortor.
The preparation>
assembly, and firing of a No.
18 cadweld splice was observed.
This cadweld was the first production splice of a newly qualified ironworker; he proceeded knowledgi.bly and confidently with the operation and the, completed'adweld was subsequently found accept-able by tPe quality contxol inspector.
The governing sp'ecifications are 13-OM-3'71, Post-Tensioning Trumplate Assemblies "and,Sheath'ing,'nd 13-CM-375, Placing of Reinforcing 'Steel.',The applicable drawings are 13-C-ZCS-114 through 119,'ontainment Building-Wall Re'inforcing-Section and Details.
I No items of noncompliance'or deviations were identified.
A
t'ain Coolant'Pum Lateral Su orts Work activities i'n progress for the.::installation of the Unit
upper lateral supports for pumps 2A.and 2B were examined by the inspector.
The bolts and their anchor plates were firmly fixed in position and the expos'ed threaded ends were appropriately covered to afford adequate, protection.
The bolts were 3-inch diameter, ASTM A540, Grade B-22, class 4 and it was verified that their physical and chemical attributes were within the limits specified in the ASTM standard.
The governing documents for the installation were specification 13-CM-125 and drawing 13-C-ZX&-
603.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
'ns ection Tours of Plant Site At various times during this inspection period, the inspector toured the plant site in order to observe general housekeeping conditions, care and preservation of equipment, handling of heavy components, tagging and identification of materials, adequacy of caps over pipe openings not being worked on, and presence of cribbing under stored pipe spools, valves and other components.
No welding electrode stubs were observed lying around the various work area ~
~
b JI
I It j
i JJ 8 I
IJ I
}
h ji I
H t
,~J
,I I
~ I I
L l I
I J
I tl IP J
JJ E
tt
I I
'"'- -'-9-V J
I No items of noncofnpliap'ce or 'deviations were identified.
i lp y'f 14. Unresolved Items
Unresolved items axe matters about whidh more information is required to ascertain whether they,',are acceptable items, items of noncompliance or deviations.
An unresolved item disclosed during the inspection is discussed in Paragraph 8.b.
15.
Mana ement Meetin s
A meeting was held on August 21, and September 3,
1981.
Licensee and Bechtel representatives in attendance at the meeting are identified in paragraph 1.
During the meeting the inspector summarized the scope of the inspection activities and reviewed the inspection findings as described in this repor Er
'
H
)g
l
0
,>
n,
J
'I I
p L
ll V
\\
4