IR 05000528/1982019
| ML20055A159 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 07/07/1982 |
| From: | Fiorelli G, Johnston G, Zwetzig G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20055A156 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-528-82-19, NUDOCS 8207150533 | |
| Download: ML20055A159 (5) | |
Text
..
_
,
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report No.
82-19 Docket No.
50-528 License No.
CPPR-141 Safeguards Group L2ensee:
Arizona Public Service Co.
P.
O.
Box 21666 Phoenix. Arizona 85036 Facility Name:
Palo Verde Nuclear Generatine Station - Unit 1 Inspection at:
Palo Verde Site. Wintersburg. Arizona Inspection conducted:
June 1-25. 1982 Inspectors:
ArbA M M, '/ / 7d'5k G9 Fifrellil, l(enior Resident Inspector U
ClaWaka hv
%gFate' Signed r,qn G3 J6hnstdn} %esident Inspector
& DWte Signed Date Signed Approved By:
hhqAf 7 / gg L G
ZwSbzig,U Chief, Reactor Proj ects Section 1 U 66te'5igned
Reactor Operations Proj ects Branch Summary:
Inspection on June 1-25, 1982 (Report No. 50-528/82-19)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced resident inspection of activities associated with preoperational testing, training, CVCS charging pumps problem, tours of the facility, witnessing of preoperational testing, and independent inspection effort.
The inspection involved 95 inspector hours by two Resident Inspectors.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
.
8207150533 820708 PDR ADOCK 05000528 G
PDR RV Fonn 219 (2)
-.
-._-
- -
.
~
._
.
--_
.
!
DETAILS
'
1. Persons Contacted
'
,
a.
Arizona Public Service Company (APS)
- G. C. Andognini, Electric Operations Vice President
- W.
B..McLane, Startup Manager-
- J. Allen, Technical. Support Manager
,
R. Taylor, Preoperational Test Manager
'
- G.
Pankonin, Startup Quality Assurance Manager
'
W. Craig, Startup Quality Assurance Supervisor J. Behm, Operations Quality Assurance Supervisor-
'
i B. Solakiewicz, Document Control Supervisor D. N. Willsey, Technical Support Supervisor F. Hicks, Training Supervisor-
P. Brandjes, Shif t Test Group Supervisor R. Burdick, Shift Test Coordinator
'
j T. Cotton, Operations Engineering Supervisor
- C.
Russo, Quality Assurance Manager j
b.
Bechtel Corporation
'
J. L. Zerucha, Startup Manager T. Aversano, Quality Control Engineer-S. Paulsen, Startup Engineer
- Attended exit meeting.
2. Follow-up of Previously Identified Items Applicant's Actions on MCC Phase Short.(82-09-04, Closedl The applicant plans to inspect all Class IE motor control units.
- Any. units found to have a potential for cable damage will be i
corrected by reorienting the screws so that the smooth head will
,
i becn1 the power cable side of the unit instead of the extended
screw section (or by some alternate method).
In Unit 1 this~will
!
be accomplished during the reconduct of Class lE circuit testing.
'
This corrective action will also be taken in Units 2 and 3 during initial testing.
The applicant has formally reported this matter
'
to Region V.
3. Startup Testing a.
Prerequisite Testing
l The applicant's special technical review group completed its review of the results of the electrical prerequisite tests
'
j completed to date.
Except for the resolution of a few times,
\\
L f
_.
~. _ _ _. _.. _ _ _. _..,
...
..
.
- _. _.. _
.. -
-
. -
f
.
.
-2-they have determined through the evaluation of test records and the functional verification of some equipment, that the components needed to support the primary system hydrostatic test have demonstrated the necessary degree of operability and their use will not compromise personnel safety.
Based on these findings, testing activities to complete preparations for the hydrostatic test have resumed.
The group also determined that only approximately 30 percent of the electrical prerequisite data will support a confirma-tion that equipment performance meets technical requirements.
The remainder is either rejectable or undergoing further technical review by the APS operations engineering group.
Corrective actions have included organizational adjustments,
revision of generic electrical test procedures, placing a hold on further electrical testing (except for limited test-ing to support the hydrostatic test) until the procedures are written and an evaluation of required retesting has been completed.
In addition, a permanent prerequisite test re-sults review group has been formed and given the charter of reviewing all future prerequisite testing records.
The problems with testing were identified by the applicant's staff and the corrective actions were initiated by APS management.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were noted.
b.
Preoperational Test Procedure Reviews The following preoperational test procedures were reviewed for technical content, regulatory conformance and consistency with administrative control governing procedure development, review and approval:
(1)
Auxiliary Feed Water System (2)
Containment Spray System The inspector noted several instances where systems components were not being tested to confirm FSAR descriptions of com-ponent performance.
These omissions were brought to the attention of APS test personnel for inclusion in revisions to procedures or for incorporation in other preoperational test procedures.
No items of noncompliance or deviation were note. ___
-
_
.
.
-3-
,
4. Plant Tours Several tours of the plant were conducted during the period.
Housekeeping efforts continued but this subject still requires constant attention by the applicant.
No instances of equipment
'
damage or potential fire hazards were noted.
'
A review of shift log books indicated operations personnel were finding an increasing number of cases of tagging discrepancies related to molded circuit breakers.
APS issued instructions for a complete audit of clearances affecting these breakers along with an improved method for affixing tags to them.
Test coordination efforts are maturing with increased testing experience.
Adjustments to administrative controls are being j
made to procedures as increased testing knowledge is acquired.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were noted.
5. Chemical Volume and Control Charging Pumps During a preoperation check of the charging pump oil levels, it was noted that the oil levels were higher than normal.
Upon draining the excess fluid it was noted that water was mixed with the pump oil.
This condition existed in each of the three pumps.
Each pump was drained and inspected internally for damage.
None was noted and after refilling, the pumps were operated.
Operating
,
problems were experienced from other causes but no detrimental effects were apparent from the contaminated oil.
The applicant has investigated the matter and considers the most prcbable cause
,
for the condition to be related to a malicious act.
The licensee i
plans to strengthen surveillance of plant equipment and buildings.
No items of noncompliance or deviation were noted.
6. Training The inspector attended 2 training sessions during the period.
The training subjects were (1) Plant Monitoring Systems and (2) General Employee Training.
Both courses were identified in the plant training program.
The sessions were'well. attended, in-structive, and consistent with training program objectives and FSAR commitments.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were noted.
I
!
l i
l
_..,
.-
__-
_.__,_ _ _.
-
_
.
.
-4-7.
Preoperational Test Witnessing The first major milestone preoperational test, the Reactor Coolant
,
System Hydrostatic test commenced during the inspection period.
The applicant's startup organization has completed the prerequisitas for the test.and systems necessary for support of the test have been released to the startup organization.
Control room activities during the latter stages of the filling and venting of the Low Pressure Safety Injection System were observed by the inspector.
The activit"es were performed under the supervision of a shift supervisor assigned to the test, to-gether with six operators.
The inspector _ toured areas throughout the plant associated with the test.
Access control-to test areas where hydrazine could present a hazard, is through a control point which limits access to qualified personnel.
The areas in-cluded the containment lower elevations, and rooms containing equipment in the auxiliary buidling that communicate with the Reactor Coolant System.
The test is scheduled to continue into the next inspection period.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were noted.
l a
8.
Exit Meeting An exit meeting was held on June 17, 1982, with Mr. G. C. Andognini and members of his staff.
The findings of the inspection were j'
discussed.
The applicant agreed with the inspector on matters re-quiring attention.
The inspector pointed out several positive actions taken by the applicant to improve the startup test program.
l
!
!
l l
l l
l l
l
.