IR 05000528/1989005
| ML17304B110 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 03/27/1989 |
| From: | Burdoin J, Mark Miller, Richards S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17304B109 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-528-89-05, 50-528-89-5, 50-529-89-05, 50-529-89-5, 50-530-89-05, 50-530-89-5, NUDOCS 8904200196 | |
| Download: ML17304B110 (16) | |
Text
U.
S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report Nos.
50-528/89-05, 50-529/89-05, 50-530/89-05 Docket Nos.
50-528, 50-529, 50-530 License Nos.
NPF-41, NPF-51, NPF-74 Licensee:
Arizona Nuclear Power Project P.
0.
Box 52034 Phoenix, Arizona 85072-2034 Facility Name:
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS) Units 1, 2 and
Inspection at:
Palo Verde Site, Wintersburg, Arizona Inspection Conducted:
January 30, 1989 through February 24, 1989 Inspector:
F.
B doin, Reactor Inspector
~'te i ned H
,
ctor I ector ate Si ned Approved by:
A.
ich r s, Chief, Engineering Section te igned
~Summau Ins ection on Januar
1989 - Februar
1989 Re ort Nos.
50-528/89-05 50-529/89-05 50-530/89-05 Areas Ins ected:
An unannounced routine inspection by two regional inspectors of various vital areas and equipment in the plant, an assessment of followup items, and of the licensee's Electrical Maintenance program.
Inspection Procedure Nos; 30703, 62705, 71707, 92701 and 93702 were used as guidance for the inspection.
Results:
General Conclusions The licensee's actions taken to clarify followup items and to correct deficiencies resulting from followup items were thorough, timely, properly documented, and adequate.
Also, the licensee's presentations of the different aspects of the Electrical Maintenance program were thorough, well documented and adequate.
S904200196 S90327 ~
PDR 4DOCK 050005>+
P C
II
Si nificant Safet Matters:
None Summar of Violations or Deviations:
None 0 en Items Summar
One SSFI inspection open item was closed, and one item left ope t(
DETAILS Persons Contacted The below listed technical and supervisory personnel were among those contacted:
Arizona Nuclear Power Pro'ect ANPP
"R. Badsgard, Resident Engineering Supervisor J.
Barrows, Jr., Electrical Engineering Supervisor R. Bernier, Nuclear Licensing C.
Day, Electrical Standards Supervisor
"M. Hypse, Electrical Engineer
"J.
Haynes, Vice President, Nuclear Production L. Henson, Electrical Systems Engineering Supervisor M. Hodge, Mechanical Engineering Supervisor
"J. Kirby, Director Nuclear Production Support
"S. Karimi, Compliance Engineer
"0 ~ Larkin, Compliance Engineer A. McCabe, Maintenance Manager Unit 1
- K. McCandless-Clark, Lead Compliance Engineer M. Melton, Metallurgical Engineer L. Papworth, Director, guality Assurance
"W. Phalen, Design Engineer J.
Juan, Licensing Engineer A. Rogers, Manager, Licensing R. Schaller, Assistant Plant Manager, Unit 1 J.
Schmadeke, Manager, Operation Computer System S.
Schroeder, Electrical Engineer T. Shriver, Compliance Manager T. Stewart, guality Investigation Administrator M. Stewart, Electrical Maintenance Supervisor, Unit 2
"L. Souza, guality Audits 8 Monitoring Manager T. Thompson, Resident Engineering, Electrical M. Winsor, Lead Mechanical Engineer 0. Zeringue, Plant Manager, Unit 3 The inspector also talked with other licensee personnel during the course of the~inspection.
- Attended the Exit Meeting on February 3, 1989.
- " Attended the Exit Meeting on February 24, 1989.
Area Ins ection 71707 An independent inspection was conducted of the Units 2 and 3 Control, Auxiliary Buildings and MSS Structure.
The inspectors examined areas and equipment for debris, potential hazards, oil and water leakage, and equipment condition, e. g., oil level, valve position, and electrical connection configuration and cleanliness.
The equipment and areas inspected included:
Unit 2 A.
B.
C.
0.
E.
F.
G.
H.
Two 4160/480V switchgear rooms (trains A and B).
Four 125V battery rooms.
Four battery equipment rooms.
Two remote shutdown panel rooms.
Two diesel generator machine rooms.
Two diesel generator control rooms.
Two auxiliary feedwater rooms Plant control room.
Unit 3 A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
Two 4160/480V switchgear rooms (trains A and B).
Four 125 V battery rooms.
Four battery equipment rooms.
Two remote shutdown panel rooms.
Two diesel generator machine rooms.
Two diesel generator control rooms.
Plant control room.
Air handling equipment room B (elev. 74').
Housekeeping and equipment status appeared to be acceptable.
No violations or deviations were identified.
3.
Followu of Previous Ins ector Identified Items 92701 Closed Item 50-528/87-11-01 - Block Wall Ade uac Unit 1 This item concerns the adequacy of masonry block walls in the control building 74 foot elevation level.
The issues and associated resolution are as follows:
(1)
A more conservative coefficient of friction (0.5 vice 0.7)
should have been used in the wall shear transfer calculation.
Since the full calculation was not available, use of the conservative friction value could not be verified.
Resolution:
The full design calculation was reviewed and a
friction factor value of 0.5 was verified.
(2)
The plates bolted to the wall have no minimum bearing area specified.
In addition, there was no requirement to record bearing area between the wall and the plates.
Resolution:
The plate installation is designed to increase wall stiffness and mitigate the wall's out of plane bending during a safe shutdown earthquake.
This is accomplished by the mechanism of shear transfer; a function of the normal force exerted by the bolts fastening the plates to the wall.
The normal force has been verified by the bolt torque, and verification of bearing area is not necessar (3)
The wall calculations used design bolt torque values rather than minimum allowed torque values.
Therefore, the calculation
'as not conservative.
Resolution:
The calculation was reevaluated using minimum allowable torque values.
The resulting shear transfer capacity is 97K of allowable for 5/8" bolts.
ANPP considers this value acceptable based on the conservatism of an assumed 25K bolt relaxation.
(4)
Because the complete design calculation was not available, earlier inspections'ould not verify that the wall's composite design was effective.
Resolution:
As a result of review of the composite design calculation, the composite design was verified to be acceptable.
Based on the above resolutions, this item is considered closed.
b.
0 en Item 50-528/88-01-10 Essential Coolin Water EW S stem Calculation Concerns Unit 1 The January 1988 NRC SSFI team reviewed calculation 13-MC-EW-200, Revision 1, regarding the sizing of the EW surge tank.
This issue was addressed in Inspection Report 50-528/88-39 with one aspect unresolved.
The licensee's design engineers agreed that calculations confirmed that the relief valve setpoint of 15 PSIG would be reached prior to completion of the coolant thermal expansion into the surge tank, resulting in relief valve actuation under normal operation, i.e.; plant cooldown.
The licensee initiated an Engineering Evaluation Request (EER) for a design change, to resolve this issue.
During this inspection the inspector examined EER 88-EW-017 to resolve the above issue.
A Plant Change Request (PCR) to add an automatic valve to relieve the tank at 82 1 psig.
was prepared.
However, the PCR has not as yet been approved to perform the modifications.
This item remains open pending the resolution of the PCR.
No'iolations or deviations were identified.
4.
Electrical Maintenance of Com onents and S stems 6270 The inspector completed his examination of the licensee's program for electrical maintenance of components and systems.
This inspection, to ascertain that corrective and preventive maintenance activity are/were conducted in accordance with licensee-approved procedures and instructions, was initiated during an inspection in January 1989, and reported in Inspection Report 50-528/89-01 dated February 9, 198 The inspector examined the below listed procedures which describes the maintenance program at the Palo Verde Station.
These procedures are applicable to unit maintenance (all three units), central mai'ntenance, operation computer systems, construction and any equivalent work organization utilized to conduct maintenance functions and activities.
Procedure Title Revision/Date 30AC-9ZZ01 30DP-9WP01 30DP-9WP02 30DP-9MOP01 30AC-9WP04 30DP-9WP05 30AC-9MP02 30DP-9WP06 Work Control Work Identification Work Planning Conduct of Maintenance Retest Work Order Completion and Closing Preventive Maintenance Corrective Maintenance Rev.
10/25/88 Rev.
0 - 11/1/88 Rev.
0 - 8/22/88 Rev.
1 - ll/1/88 Rev.
1 - ll/1/88 Rev.
1 - ll/1/88 Rev.
0 - 11/1/88 Rev.
0 - 8/22/88 Four maintenance groups at Palo Verde perform all the maintenance work for the three units.
fach unit has its own maintenance group which performs both corrective and preventative maintenance tasks.
Central maintenance (the forth group) supports the three unit maintenance groups by being assigned the larger maintenance jobs which require more resources than those available to unit maintenance groups.
Central maintenance supports unit maintenance groups during refueling outages and major shutdowns of the plant, and, also, manages contracts for outside maintenance labor and services for the station.
The construction group supports plant maintenance by performing major modifications to the plant such as a new piping system.
They, also, manage construction contracts which relate to major maintenance, along with other construction contracts.
The above procedures were reviewed and found to describe maintenance standards and instructions for identifying, developing, approving, coordinating, controlling, implementing, and completing and closing all maintenance (corrective and preventive)
work orders at the Palo Verde Station.
The ins~ctor also examined fifteen work orders, some from each of the four maingenance groups to determine if this activity is being performed in accordance with prescribed procedures.
The work orders appeared to be in order and to conform to applicable procedures.
Electrical Maintenance Contracts Central maintenance initiates and administers contracts for maintenance.
There are two types of maintenance contracts; labor and service contracts.
The contract support personnel brought in under a labor contract are required to take a formal orientation/indoctrination program, the same as new maintenance personnel, so that each employee has a clear
understanding of expected conduct, accountabilities, and familiarization with station maintenance work control practices.
Contract services supply their own supervision.
However, they are required to comply with approved ANPP work control programs.
The following two procedures control contract maintenance:
12AC-OPP06 Contract Formation Rev.
0 " 11/1/88 124C-OPR08 Contract Administration Rev.
0 - ll/1/88 The inspector, after reviewing the above contract procedures and discussing the programs with.the contract administrators, concluded that the controls fot contract labor and services are adequate.
Maintenance Failure Data Trendin FDT and E ui ment Histor The inspector reviewed the licensee's failure data trending (FTD) program which is described in administrative procedure 81AC-ORAOl, Revision 0, dated September 28, 1988 "Failure Data Trending Procedure".
The FDT system interfaces with the root cause and human performance evaluation system (HPES).
The PVNGS FDT System is designed to identify early trends in equipment failures, to eliminate costly repairs and potentially unnecessary plant down, time; and to provide a mechanism for Evaluations Engineering to initiate root cause analysis (RCA) or other actions as appropriate.
A computer program has been established for maintaining equipment history and trending development.
A component failure data trending quarterly reported is prepared and issued to the evaluations engineering manager and the system engineering supervisors, for distribution to the appropriate engineering discipline and system engineers.
The inspector audited the licensee's equipment history records by selecting and reviewing the history records on a sample of eight randomly selected pieces of equipment.
The inspector also examined the trending developed for several components.
It is concluded that the licensee's equipment failure trending program and history records have been properly implemented and appear to be adequate.
Procurement En ineerin The inspector reviewed procurement engineering to determine if procedures and instructions were established to ensure that procurement of new, replacement, subst'ituted, and spare equipment, components, and materials utilized in plant maintenance, satisfies the original or upgraded engineering specifications, qualifications and addresses Eg requirements.
The inspector interviewed procurement engineering supervisors and examined the following applicable procedures and instructions:
INST.MS02.03.01,
"Review and processing class and item additions and modifications" Rev.
2-10/28/88 INST. IMS01. 04. 01,
"Mater ial Engineering Evaluation" Rev 0-12/21/87
The inspector concluded that the licensee's procedures and instructions established adequate controls for engineering review and evaluation of procurement of properly specified and qualified equipment, components, and materials for utilization in the maintenance program for the three units.
Conclusion The electrical maintenance program at Palo Verde, as described in the procedures above, has been appreciably upgraded since the SSF inspection in January/February 1988.
One of these inspectors, who was a team member of the 1988 SSF inspection, identified major improvements in procedures which were revised or rewritten in late 1988, over those earlier procedures.
It is concluded that the Palo Verde Electrical Maintenance program is adequately described and outlined in the procedures and instructions.
It appears that the appropriate controls have been established and implemented and, if properly followed, will ensure an adequate maintenance program for the station.
No violations or deviations were identified.
Exit Meetin 30703 The inspectors conducted exit meetings on February 3 and 24, 1989, with members of the licensee staff as indicated in paragraph 1.
During these meetings, the inspectors summarized the scope of the inspection activities and reviewed the inspection findings as described in this report.
The licensee acknowledged the concerns identified in the report.