IR 05000528/1987008

Mgt Meeting Repts 50-528/87-08,50-529/87-09 & 50-530/87-09 on 870204.Major Areas Discussed:Util Evaluation of Causes & Implementation of Corrective Actions Re Recent Operational Events.Meeting Agenda Encl

ML20212N154
Person / Time
Site:	Palo Verde
Issue date:	02/27/1987
From:	Richards S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20212N117	List: IR 05000528/1987008 ML20212N115
References
50-528-87-08-MM, 50-528-87-8-MM, 50-529-87-09, 50-529-87-9, 50-530-87-09, 50-530-87-9, NUDOCS 8703120380
Download: ML20212N154 (6)

Text

g

_

7 g

_

s

-

~

'

,

-

,

\\;;

,

.

-

-

_

.

,.

,

,

.

.

-

-

p.,

.-

,

.

.

,

<,s

,

I -

%'

r g

l-

' U.' S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION

,

,

,

REGION V,

~

Report Nos:

50-528/87-08 50-529/87-09-50-530/87-09

~

Docket Nos-

. 50-528 50-529

<

50-530

,

,

Lice'nse Nos:

NPF-41

- NPF-51-

,

CPPR-143 Licensee:

Arizona Nuclear Power Project

'

P. O. Box 52034 Phoenix, AZ. 85072-2034

-

Facility Namei

~Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Units 1, 2 & 3.

Meeting Location:

. NRC Region V Office, Walnut Creek, California

'

' Meeting Conducted:. February 4, 1987 Approved By:

M8M2:yM/A Ms

1. ,7 7-B7 :

- 5 har ef, -

-

Date Signed

-

,

!

.

%

.

,

.

i

'

i-

+

i. <

0703120380 870227 PDR ADOCK 05000528 G

PDR I

s

m

--'

n-

=,

,

m

,

,

-

a

,

,

-

,

w n,

.

,

-

- '

_

s

-

==

..

.

.

sjJ jj '

'_

"

-

• I i

'

.

-

,

,

t

-

x

~

-.

,

,

'

c

~

g s.

-

,

_.

,,

'

DEkAILS-

..

'.

..q

-

i E

'

'

.

.

a

-

.

e,

%

'1.

Meeting Participants:-

~

^

(

,

'

>2 Nuclear' Regulatory Commission (NRC)

.

,

--

.

. : J. Martin, Regio'nal Ad$inistrator

'

s

"D. -Kirsch,, Director,' Division of. Reactor Safety and Projects G. Knighton, Project. Director,~ Power Project Directorate #7,5NRR;

-

.

' R.'.Pate, Chief, Reactor Safety Branch:

R.'Zimmerman, Senior Resident 1 Inspector, PVNGS'

.

,

'

C. Sorensen,-Project Inspector, P.VNGS

.

Arizona Nuclear Power Project-(ANPP).

.

E.. Van B' unt, Jr., Executive Vice1 President

'

r-J. Haynes, Vice President, Nuclear Production

s

..

W. Ide, Corporate Quality Assurance Manager

.

J. Bynum, PVNGS Plant Manager

.

-

R. Butler, Director, Technical Services,

.

,,

'.

O. Zeringue, Technical Support. Manager.

T. Shriver, Compliance Manager

-

. j'

W. Fernow, Training. Manager

.

R. Papworth, Acting : Production' Engineering' Manager?

,

G. Sowers, Acting Operations Engineering Manager. -

Other licensee management aild supervisory personnel; participate'd in

~

the meeting,on February 4, 1987.

'

2.-

Management Discussion w

.

A management meeting was held on February 4, 1987;'at the ANPP

-

Corporate Engineering Office in Phoenix, Arizona.

The' meeting agenda is.provided as enclosure 2.

The. meeting was opened by Mr.

Martin who stated that,a benefit existedain periodically holding management meetings to' discuss the licensee's response to recent events at the Palo Verde site.

Mr. Martin emphasized that the-first several years of' plant operation;are a critical period-for the licensee, in that the personality of the organization is shaped, l

with change becoming more difficult with time.

.

Mr. Shriver then opened the discussion with'an update of plant

!

performance indicators at Palo Verde through calendar year 1986.

In

-

general, the performance indicators showed an improving trend during

'

the third and fourth quarters of the year, which'Mr. Bynum attributed to: specific corrective actions taken following previous l

plant problems; implementation of the inter-department event investigation (IEI) program for review of personnel errors; and,

'

'

general maturity and experience gained by the site organization.

Mr. Martin acknowledged the improving trend and stated that performance indicators serve as a useful management tool but should

i.

,

'

lt

- -

--

.

., _.. - _, _

ny w

,

,

,.,

,,

~p'

-

~

"

,

y,q n --

Q h?h { ds

• '

M'

"'

l y

,2

- :

'

cs4

,

,

~t,

~

' ~

['~

12 ?

, J n;'J'

g4 K

'

' ~

'

S

~

_

,

-

.<

[.s q,'

s_

-

,,

. C

,,

"

'

n.~

,

,

.,

,

,

c'

, -

,

,

,

_

.'y

'

m

.

og_

,

,

,

not be"uded' singularly to evaluate plant performance.; Ms.: Van;

.

l-

~

,

'.

J-Brunt,fJr.iagreed with the. comment

-

H

.t

-

- ' *

,,q

-

-

- n

.

-

v

-

-.w i Mr..Bynum'presentedthe' detail'sfa'ssociatedwithare'adtortrip'at

.

.

,

-

..... s

'

' Unit 2onDecember24,E1986. lag'roundfaulton'a125VDCbus e

?

r

.-

L -

,

,e, resulted inia shutdown of. thel"B 1 Inverter,'and a. subsequent 1oss of?

~

' ' '

'

power to plant protection system (PPS)Lchannel "B".4 Ar R

'

'

. =

_ -malfunctioning power supply.-(PS-1) in:an auctioneered PPS;circuitito^

_

%"

' the.A" channel bistable relays caused a degraded voltage to the "A":

.._s

~

,

.

,

,

bistable relays and resulted in a reactor trip and;a'. number.'of)

x'

,,

engineered _ safety' feature act' ations. 0The malfunctioning component,

' '

- '

-

u

,

. ' -

- ".

'7

~ PS-1, was returned to:the supplier to determine-the cause of;

"

-

~

'

,

'

failure.~ This led to a detailed discussion'concerning the design v,

.

and operation ofaPS-1 and how well; its toperation was? understood by

.

R

' the-licensee prior,to the reactor trip. LMr. Bynum! indicated d 11

• f

- considerable information regarding~the design and operation o;that-

.

f PS-1 7'

,

was. learned during'the post trip review'processa Mr.= Martin stated 7 that the, licensee needs to shoulder th'= responsibility for.

e P

understanding complex system / component design _in detail; and that an

.

,,; ~

effective technology. transfer program between the licensee and.their.

suppliers is necessary;to maximize.that level of knowledge. The

'

.

'

W licensee concurred,~and'said thatla-technology transfer program was!

" -

.

being developed.Mr. Kirsch quest.ioned whether the originating.

,

~

'

j ground fault, associated with a, loose _ sockets.in a Control Room panel f-

~

-

"2 indicating light',J was a' ' design problem.S Although theilicensee's. M initial investigation concluded the looselsocket was.not a design

~

s

,

problem,aMr; 'Bynum stated that the design; adequacy would be

'

.,

~ g/ '. a L-reevaluated.

y i

,

.

~

OnJanuary10,<1987,'areactorpowercutback1occurredatUnitl'dueY

.

'

'

..

.

.

,

.

~

to a malfunctioning-sub-synchronous relay which opened the main;

-

+

generator output breakers.';Mr. Bynum provided,the details

[ g ~n surrounding theTreactor trip which' occurred l shortly, thereafter on

,e high steam generator level; EThe-trip was attributed to personnel y

<' :

'

n error.

-A Control Room. operator, handling feedwater control (FWC)

'~

'

_

^

following the cutback' used' master manu'al, manual individual, and c

f, automatic FWC to stabilize steam generator > levels.. Failure to matchi

% <-

the manual and automatic. demand signals prior to transferring the u

.6, method of control aggravated.the operator' stability to control steam

<

F:

generator, level.

Mr. Bynum and Mrc.Fernow discussed the licensee's

!

"

~

N

. corrective. actions for; this' event, which included; 1) the issuance of guidelines to assist operators by detailing the desired response

during feedwater, transients, 2) steps to improve the simulator's

~

~modeling of steam generator control, (including feedwater control)

.

- scheduled.for implementation during the third and fourth quarters'of

'

calendar year 1987, and 3) the stressing of lessons learned from

this trip in requalification training class.

.y Mr. Zeringue discussed the discovery on January 8,1987, of a closed '

.

.

inlet valve to the Unit 1 Fuel Building radioactive gas effluent i "_ '

monitor, rendering the monitor inoperable.

It was not detemiaed i

when or why the valve was closed. The discussion centered around j.

'

the licensee's actions taken and planned to prevent a similar occurrence.

c7.

-

.

.

S

%

g i,,,.-

e..v g

,k m.i.-m e

.c.gri--

.,9yq.g

,p.9,w-

,,%g.,y

,

,,,-myme.,.,,,..gyw

,

_g my g,.

,g,

-

g....,,,,,.,

._,.,m,,,

,.,w,,,.

,.c,-es.

w--

--

-

,

,

y> ~ :

w :V

--m y'.

y

., y ;yypp

~

.w,%

, s.

- n

-

.

v c

,nc

>

,4

_

w yg:,

,9+.

-

37 g g-w

,. * (, (7

,g, g J.

3,

.c~

,

y y +

g-

-.

<

& @m i /g j.

-

w

.

>

.

fy

.e_

y

-

% ' u,

,

'

,

y

,

,

jEMW% W,

%~

5;'

r ei! y ? h.

.

NP

' '

~'

'

'

,

j?Q.:%

,,

.(

,(

[ _ ~

';-

~

.

,

_

s s

,

,,,.

~

,

'" M V

iThe failure of the-Unit 3 "B"-D.iesel Generator during'preoperatio'oal J.

.

U-

'

,: testing was briefly' described by.Mr. Ide...The.cause of the failura,'

~

~-

,#

,

Ap' A Iwhich resulted in/a cracked master connecting rod,Lwas,cor.cluded ttr p-

~

,

have.been from the :useLof' crack' prone f ron plating for repair workV

-

,

.

during original diesel, fabrication 1?The licensee reviewed all 6'

!

C

'

o

-

"

.

connecting rod fabrication recordiifor alI six diesel engines

_.

'

..

,y',

onsite,;and: replaced thoseirods which used. iron plating for' #

E

-,

y'

'

'

-. structural: repair;in.highLstress areas. :Mr. Ide. stated that nickel

+

^

.y.

',

plating lwas=also used'as a repair technique byJth4 jupplier in:

"'

certain instances; however,jthe ni:kel-was not prone to cracking

'

f s

,

like the iron. Mr. Martin commented that it appeared prudent tuz

.

contact additional. diesel engine expsrts.to : ensure nickel plQing Gr.

'

,other.similar repair techniques are considered,to

methods.

Mr. Van Brunt ^, Jr. said that ANPP= would be proper npair

- Mr r

speak with other

diesel manufacturersito ensure the appropriateness of the repair,

<

.

techniques performed.-

'

.

,.

.

?-

'

~

'

.

LMr.vShriverithen'd'iscussed three instances in which plant' personnel

'

1 improperly documented performance of~ tasks which they did not

'

'

.

,

' actually complete. The discussion addressed tne disciplinary action

'

"

,

. taken against the; individuals as well as steps being taken;by the

'

licensee to stress the importance.of proper completion and

-

,

documentation of assigned tasks. 'Also addressed were the results of

-

A an. internal. audit of various departments {to determine, on.,a sampling:

i ba' sis,^if improper documerytation by personnel,had generic overtones.

'

One of the three'above mentictied individuals wa's: identified during-

..

this-review.. sMr.DMartin expressed concern over these occurrences (

and urged that further internal-review be accceplished to determine a possible.cause.or catalyst of this problem.. It was agreed that-

.-

.this subject would be di,scussed further in a future meeting.

'

.

,

...

-

~

-Mr.! Sowers provided?a brief updateLo.n the. status'of' Unit 1 eddy

.

'

'

'

current test (ECT)'resultsrfollowing a plant chutdown'.on January 18,-

'

,

o

.1987, due to a tube-leakiin Steam Generator 1.

Preliminary ECT

,

results identified wear associated with about 20stubes (including the leaker) at thelfirst egg-crate elevation in the cold leg corners

.

of.both steam generators._ The licensee stated that Combastion

Engineering was assisting in' evaluating the wear phenomenon.

,

The discussion ~ then shifted to updates of prev 1 bus issues discussed

'

at.a December 17, 1986, management' meeting and documented in Report

>50-528/86-38; 50-529/86-38,- arid >50-530/86-32. ;Mr. Shriver provided

,

=

an update <on the emergency, lighting deficiencies}which were ?

<

-

considered to have resulted from poor communications betwee6 the various ANPP. groisps involved..An investigation by the licensee into the lighting problem was expected to be completed,near the end of

'

,

.~

February, 1987.c Corrective actions underway included evaluat.ing other license conditions and FSAR commitments to ensure adequate preventive _ maintenance programs existed to maintain equipment

,

operability.

s m.

S.

.

Mr. Zeringue'then briefly explained the implementation of the systar engineer program, including duties and responsibilities, and

'

<

.

l qualification and selection of system engineers.

The role of system

.-

.y~

.

_

.

l

'

.

zw;y)W 394/97[:, + MG}i!.

.

~~,'^ ~ % - l 1 -

'l-

~

Q4.h % v r [ J 7 9l Mf? ffh, ' ' W ;+hff " ~ q

.

'

y-3

-

'

'

r

...

.

Y

~

g p3, p;~a;f

-

a 33.'g

,

,

~

.

pn

'

v

n'

~

.

e -

-

.;

.m

+,keers',lasifAr as'reviewffunctions,ysuch as workiorders'and:

.

-,psk,dgn'cha'ngeIpackages'onsystems7thattheyarelrespon 4'-():[4 i

W ;dee

+

,-

_

h-vidiscussedh No decision h'as been made as of yetiby ANPP whether.

WCm*8 ls~y' stem'e'ngineerswillreview'all' work'ordersorisurveillancetest!.

'!

-

-

-

'

,

f, 7 prog)ramgfor yy~ stem engineers has'=not yettbeen' implemente

',

-

.

,

,

fg f ^

f;

e p. m,

,

= Hn.15owersSriefl'y praeht'ed thd :licen'see's performance _ monitoring :

'

@)4 l T

'

Jrogram,0 including. trending. ' Mr.- Kirsch stated that the NRC will

'

./

.

~

'

y Jfollow the trending development' closely. < Also ' ANPP: troubleshootir;

,

,

ii ' 3 Z SMchniques were briefly described,iincluding post: trip reviews, root-;

,

'

c icaise-analyses) a'nd interdepartmenta_1Levent investigationsi(IEIs).

,

$

j/'

3.

.Mr.'LMartin dhquired as,to whether these troubleshooting. techniques

'

g.

>

1. d4 V. ~

.were' fully'in p, lace,.and upon? learning that they were, stated that-

,*

'

,

p j.

M a: considered tnis to be'an important positive step.

'

'

cg

-

x

-

,

'

2w iMr. Papworth t.hkn explained the letdown ' heat exchanger nozzle crac'k W

4-c

,f Jis Unit:3.. A crack)has falso"been found:in the same location in ~

,

"

.

aunit;1,hthough not through wall. After considering all possible

.

l ~.r

_m d

-

-

#'

< failure modes'; the; licensee?datermined1that the apparent-failure

'

-

..

-

<

f " ]s.

7 mechanism ^was fatigue,- although the. fatigue analysis has not been

.

completed.

Mr ' Martin stated that he would.like to personally see

-

m.

%[

(the fatigue' analysis when it's. completed.

,

if

-

c

.r x m. _..

ty

>

(Mr'Ide:thenLprovideda~brief: overview?ofthowequipment

.

P

'

'

..

' qualification f.

'

"

f.

'

~

,

sf

.O

,

i is p ~ equ: established' and controlled at Palo Verde'.* This inc:luded how.

<- -

F f4 f,if ' > and' how equipm.nitially ;quilified; howl qualification' is niaintained, ipment is i

'

,

y?

ent~ installation i,s controlled.'

- -

n

>

,,.

,

, d ' 1. m,..'i V'The finalosubjectz

"

4.p f,

.

of discussicn'wasti dthe form of comments from the

>

!k

/" licensee'on,the mostLrecent Systematic;Assessme'ntJof' Licensee 4 1'

s AreasEdi' cussed-included the emergency iL

' Performance <(SA D > Report.

s

,

M 7'

preparedness fur.ctional area rating and the-NRC assessment of the

,

Q

'

pt

.

Evendor/contrator cohtrol area. l It Was agreed that discus'sions of

~

'

.

,

SALP would be taken up in~another meeting-

."

-

9@N ~ Mr'[Mariin tilen adjourned the meeting " noting:the

.

.

,

.

.

.

,.'

discussion.

-

t

,'

-

M*

-

.

f

j

['

-s

'

.,9., 9

.

-

a

"

=

k

'd I

-

'

'.

,.

.

..

'j f

- :

-4-..

g

'

'

>

.

,

-.

,,.

h,

'

'

.

,

s j.

.s-L

-

,

';

(,

[

-

f,-

..

s

o.

,

A f,(.

_.,. _

...; i _.;. _..., _,.,,..

....

.

...

..

...

,,,

.

,, _...,.. _. _ _ _ _ _

)

m-

.

.

, -

AGENDA

[ANP/NRC MANAGEMENT MEETING

" ~

ANP Engineering Offices, Deer Valley February 4, 1987

-

I.

Update'on Plant' Performance Indicators

'

e at i

JJ-II.

Event Review (Cause, Evaluation, Corrective Action)

$

A. UnitL2 Trip on December 24, 1986 Power Supply Failure njyj B. Unit 1 Trip on January 10, 1987 - 100% Load Rejection l

,

$ y~

.z C., Unit 1 Fuel Handling Building Ventilation Sampling-

^?

Systen' Misalignment D. EDG Failure at' Unit 3 E. Missed Radiation Monitoring Equipment Surveillances F. Steam Generator Tube Failure at Unit 1

,

III. Updates on Previous Issues A. Trending Program for Equipment History, IST Data, and Surveillances

,

B. Emergency Lighting

_

C. System Engineering Program D. Formalizing Trouble-Shooting System IV.

Follow-up From December 17, 1986, Meeting

A. Unit 3 Heat Exchanger Weld Failure B. Control of Work on EQ Equipment V.

SALP Report Discussion

!

!

- - -. - -,

-

-

-