IR 05000528/1986006
| ML17299B121 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 03/11/1986 |
| From: | Bell J, Hernandez G, Miller L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17299B120 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-528-86-06, 50-528-86-6, 50-529-86-05, 50-529-86-5, 50-530-86-04, 50-530-86-4, NUDOCS 8603310045 | |
| Download: ML17299B121 (14) | |
Text
8b0331004S 8603i3 PDR ADOCK 05000528
PDR U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report Nos.
Docket Nos.
Iicense Nos.
50-528/86-06, 50-529/86-05, and 50-530/86-04 50-528, 50-529, and 50-530 NPF-41 and NPF-46 Construction Permit No.
CPPR-143 Iicensee:
Arizona Nuclear Power Project Post Office Box 52034 Phoenix, Arizona 85072-2034 Facility Name: Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Units 1, 2, and 3.
Inspection Conducted:
anuhry 26 - February 25, 1986.
Inspectors:
/or G
~o 84 nan z, Senior Resident Inspector Dat gned
,g J.
R.
Ba
, Res'dent Inspector Approved By:
+c~ L. F. Mil er, Chief, Reactor Projects Section No.
Date S gned
~ (i36 Date S gned
~Summa Ins ection from Janua 26 - Februa
1986 (Re ort Nos. 50-528/
86-06 50-529/86-05 and 50-530/86-04).
Areas Ins ected:
A routine, onsite inspection by the Construction Resident Inspectors of activities related to Unit 3 preoperational testing activities, including examination of the licensee's monitoring program, procedure verification, maintenance of preoperational test records, and inspection and examination of records related to the in-stallation of masonary block walls in all three units.
The inspection involved 181 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC Resident Inspectors include.ng 37 inspector-hours onsite during back-shifts.
The following I.E. Manual Chapters were utilized during this inspection:
Module Nos.
35301, 39301, 47055B, 70311, and 71302.
Results:
In the areas inspected, no deviations or violations of NRC requirements Were identifie r I
J I
l
Pp I
'I t4,
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted a
~
Arizona Nuclear Power Pro'ect (ANPP)
b.
J.
'W D.
~ J d J
"W.
<A.
W.
A.
L.
~:C.
D.
T.
R, S.
J.
A.
K.
W.
D.
H.
'~W.
T.
T.
T.
J J
'"R.
>'cM.
Bec G.
W.
S.
D.
T.
"D H.
H.
"G R.
H.
G ~
D.
u E. Van Brunt, Jr., Executive Vice President G. Haynes, Vice President, Nuclear Production E. Ide, Corporate Quality Assurance Manager B. Fasnacht, Nuclear Construction Manager E. Kirby, Transition Team Manager C. Matteson, Transition Team J.
Jump, Unit No.
3 Startup Manager J.
McCabe, Unit No.
3 Assistant Startup Manager F. Quinn, Licensing Manager C. Rogers, Nuclear Engineering Manager A. Souza, Assistant Corporate Quality Assurance Manger N. Russo, Quality Assurance Audits/Monitoring Manager E. Fowler, Quality Control Manager A. Shriver, Quality Systems Engineering Manager J. Burgess, Field Engineering Supervisor G. Penick, Quality Assurance Monitoring Supervisor C. Sherrin, Quality Document Review Group Supervisor T. Ramey, Quality System Supervisor R. Daley, Quality Assurance Engineer W. Montefour, Quality Assurance Engineer M. LeBoeuf, Quality Assurance Engineer I. Green, Quality Assurance Engineer J. Gratza, Quality Assurance Engineer R. Bradish, Supervisor,'Quality Systems P. Siegfried, Quality Assurance Engineer A. Petersen, Nuclear Licensing Morita, Nuclear Licensing J.
Poche, Nuclear. Compliance F. Koudelka, Nuclear Compliance,,
htel Power Cor oration (Bechtel)
A. Hierzer, Field Construction Manager P. Murphy, Unit 3 Project Superintendent M. Nickell, Project. Superintendent R. Anderson, Chief Resident Engineer L. Horst, Project 'Field Engineer R. Hawkinson, Project Quality Assurance Manager A. Foster, Project Quality Control Engineer A. Mear, Assistant Project Quality Control Engineer Gelina, Assistant Project Quality Control Engineer Ruff, Lead Electrical/Instrumentation Quality Control Eng.
L. Thornberry, Area Project Field Engineer Griffin, I,ead Civil Quality Control Engineer Merhoff, Quality Assurance Engineer
l
>>
H Hl
)
>>,
1>>
)H P>>j
".j" v;.
)
>>>
)
v
>>
PH
>>
j H
H. Guire, Project equality Assurance Engineer J. Silvins, Civil Field Engineer
>'Denotes personnel attending the NRC Exit Management Meeting conducted on February 25, 1986.
I The inspectors also interviewe4 other licensee and contractor personnel during the course of the inspection.
2 ~
Plant Status Unit Three:
Construction completion of Unit 3 is estimated at 98%
by the licensee.
See paragraph 6.0 for a discussion of preopera-tional test activities currently in progress.
r 3.
ualit Assurance for Preo erational Testin
- Unit 3 a
~
Surveillance/Monitorin Activities o
The inspector's examination of this area determined that the licensee has a program for assuring that preoperational tests are monitored and appropriate procedures and checklists are established for the conduct of the monitoring activity, The following monitoring test reports were examined to assure they were consistent with Procedure No. 6N417.12.00,
"equality Monitoring Activities":
R~eort No.
Activit Monitored ST-86-0440 ST-86-0435 ST-86-0204 ST-86-0189 ST-86-0335 ST-86-0145 ST-86-0365 ST-86-0494 ST-86-0444 Clearance Tagging Clearance Tagging Temporary Modifications Certification and Training Instrumentation and Controls Tank Flush 480V Ioad Center Test Local Leak Rate Inspection MCC Circuit Test The inspector found the reports to be consistent with the licensee's procedures.
Deficiencies noted during the monitoring activities were apparently addressed through the licensee's corrective action system and adequately resolved.
No violations or deviations were identified.
b.
Audits The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for auditing ongoing preoperational testing activities in Unit No. 3.
The inspector verified that the licensee has in place a program for assuring that audits for preoperational testing activities are scheduled, planned, conducted and documented on a timely basis.
The ANNP Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual
I II
'4 (
It
~,$
t
II F
r
~
t Z
e k
Ee I
t I
il I
l1
~ ~
K
Procedure No. 6N417.13.00,
"equality Auditing" prescribes the methods and responsibilities for the auditing function.
This procedure details the responsibilities of the various managers in the organization, the qualifications of the managers, supervisors and auditors, the frequency of the audits, and the issuance and the methods of documentation of the audit reports.
The following audits were examined:
Audit No.
Area Examined 85-001 85-008 85-033 85-011 85-015 85-023 Inspection Corrective Action Corrective Action Training and Qualifications Instructions, Procedures, and Drawings Inspection Test. and Operating Status The inspector found the audits to be consistent with the direction provided in the licensee's procedures.
Any de-ficiencies noted were resolved through the licensee's correc-tive action system.
No violations or deviations were identified.
4.
Prep erational Testin Procedure Verification - Unit 3 The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for assuring preopera-tional test, procedures are written, reviewed and approved for preoperational testing activities consistent with regulatory gui-dance and the licensee's commitments.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's methodology for determining what tests are to be per-formed.
The inspector reviewed administrative controls for startup test preparation review and approval.
The following procedures'were reviewed as a part of this inspection:
90GA-OZZ22 Startup Discipline Test Schedule (DTS)
90GA-OZZ23 Startup Test Criteria 90AC-OZZ09 Startup Test Working Group 90AC-OZZ14 Startup Procedure Preparation Review and Approval The inspector also reviewed the licensee's procedure index and status report, for Unit 3.
The inspector concluded that the licensee has developed or is developing test. procedures for use in'nit 3 based on procedures used in both Units 1 and 2 which will include flushing of systems, generic.testing'f electrical, components and instrumentation, component and'ipe"expansion testing, inservice inspection and testing of non-safety related systems, such as the plant communications or instrument aii'systems.
The licensee's development of test procedures for preoperational testing activities appeared to be consistent with regulatory guidance'nd FSAR commitments.
f'
I
,1 '
$
I
,f I
L LI V
I EI N
L s
Pl lg L
II Il I
I '
I I
L
,I L
I I
H I
I I~ If II lr fj, II
'l L
P lj I
s J
L I
I C'g
'
V,
.tI'aV~E w
I
,I Il I
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Prep erational Test. Records - Unit 3 The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for the control and maintenance of records generated during preoperational testing in Unit 3.
The inspector verified administrative controls had been established for maintaining records for the following types of activities; preoperational test procedures and results, corrective and preventive maintenance, audits and surveillance, personnel training and qualification, design changes and modifications, and component, system and structure turnovers from Construction to Startup.
The following administrative procedures were reviewed by the inspector:
90PR-OZZ03 Startup Document Control Program 90GA-OZZ02 Startup Information Center 9N219.05.00 Document Record Turnover Control 9N219.06.00 Startup Document Control Retention The inspector discussed with the licensee's personnel the manner in which records were filed, how and where they could be retrieved, what provisions existed for governing access to files and what method was used to maintain accountability of records removed from storage.
The inspector examined the licensee's storage facility.
The in-spector verified selected records were being maintained in accord-ance with the applicable administrative controls.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Review of Prep erational Test Activities - Unit 3 b.
Major preoperational test activities in progress during the reporting period included flushing of the Essential Cooling Water System, portions of the Safety Injection/Shutdown Cooling System and Containment.
Spray System.
Generic testing of motor operated valves and their associated motor control centers was also continuing.
t During the course of the inspection, tours of the following plant areas were conducted:
b'Xb it b
bt, ib Control Room Auxiliary Building, Radwaste Building
.
Turbine Building Main Steam Suppor't,.Structure~
Containment Yard Area and Perimeter Control Building (Cable Spreading Rooms 6 Ventilation Support Systems)
w CI s
fq'
p I
l J
J, p
A
c.
The following areas were observed during the tours:
1.
Control Room logs and records.
Records were reviewed for completeness and accuracy to verify conformance with administrative procedure requirements.
2.
Equipment tagging.
Selected equipment in which tagging requests had been initiated, was observed to verify that tags were in place and the equipment in the condition specified.
3.
Plant housekeeping.
Plant conditions were observed for conformance with administrative procedures.
No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Concrete Masona Block Walls - Units
2 and
)
During the NRC Constructioh Assdssment Team (CAT) inspection con-ducted during January-February 1986 of Palo Verde Unit No. 3, a
concern was identified relative to>the adequacy of non-structural masonary block walls and their ability to perform their function under seismic conditions.
Non-struck'ural block walls are installed in the Control and Auxilia'ry,Buildings 'of all'hree units.
The block walls are used as, fire protection barriers, and as compartments to house various equipment.
" The concern initially identified by the CAT team related to th'e inspection records, for the erection of the block walls.
Apparently because-the walls. are "S" class (were classified "S", or non safe'ty related),-
and quality oz field inspection was not required to be performed.
Subsequent.
inspection by the CAT team members of the Unit'3 block walls determined that reinforcing steel apparentl'y was not installed at the outer faces of the blocks as required by design, but rather at the center of the blocks.
These two findings (the location of the reinforcing steel in the block, and the lack of inspection records for the erection of the block walls) indicated that the walls, from an engineering calculational viewpoint, might not be, able to 'perform their function under postulated seismic conditions.
On February 12, 1986, the NRC resident inspectors, a
CAT team member and the licensee randomly examined the masonary block walls in the Unit No.
2 Control Building with a magnetic rebar locator.
The NRC inspectors found one area at the 74 foot elevation of the Control Building where low magnetic rebar readings, were encountered and another area (at the same elevation and on the same wall) where the reinforcing steel appeared to be staggered, that is, not spaced continuous as required by design.
These findings were immediately brought to the attention of the licensees During the weekend of February 15-16, 1986, the licensee performed spot, checks of block walls in Unit No.
1 and found (at the 74 foot elevation) of the Control Building, staggered reinforcing steel on the block walls.
The licensee also performed spot radiography of the area in Unit No.
2 where the low magnetic rebar readings were
'I g
1 E.
I J 1'
v
)A f"
"4
"
g
V~
c f
P
found.
The licensee's radiographic examination indicated that the reinforcing steel was installed as required.
In summary, three findings remain unresolved for all the block walls in all three units:
reinforcing steel was located at the center of the blocks instead of the outer faces; evaluation of the effect of staggered reinforcing steel; and inspection during the erection of the block walls was not, performed.
These factors enter into the calculations and the ability of the walls to perform under seismic conditions.
These findings, have been forwarded to NRR for technical evaluation.
The CAT team is also reviewing the licensee's response to these same questions.
This item is considered unresolved pending evaluation of the licensee response.
(Unresolved Item Nos. 50-528/86-06/Ol and 50-529/86-05/Ol).
8.
Exit Interview The NRC inspectors met on February 25, 1986, with licensee manage-ment representatives denoted in paragraph l.
The scope of the inspection and inspection findings as noted in this report were discusse t A
!