IR 05000528/1982021

IE Insp Rept 50-528/82-21 on 820701-16.No Noncompliance Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Startup Testing,Primary Sys Hydrostatic Test,Document Control & Preventive Maint

ML20062J152
Person / Time
Site:	Palo Verde
Issue date:	07/22/1982
From:	Fiorelli G, Johnston G, Zwetzig G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20062J138	List: IR 05000528/1982021 ML20062J135
References
50-528-82-21, NUDOCS 8208160279
Download: ML20062J152 (4)

Text

~

.

-

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION V

Report N /82-21 Docket N License N CPPR-141 Safeguards Group Licensee: Arizonn Public Service C O. Box 21666 Phnoniv. Arizonn 85036 Facility Name: Pnlo Verde Nuclear Generating Station - Unit 1 Inspection at: Palo Verde Site. Wintersburg, Arizona Inspection conducted: July 1-16. 1982 Inspectors: 4b Alp 22.,/qf2_

G.4Fidhellil $ehior Resident Inspector v G) ate Signed b U 21, f 9 7 2 G .O JohWstonVRblident Inspector Gate Signed Date Signed Approved By: 2 2 , / 14' 2--

l Zw66 zig, Qhief, Reactor Projects Section lv DWte Signed G .I Reactor Operations Projects Branch Summary: Inspection on July 1-16, 1982 (Report No. 50-528/82-21)

Areas Inspected: Routine resident inspection of startup testing, primary system hydrostatic test, document control and preventive maintenance. The inspection involved 106 inspector hours on-site by the resident inspector Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie . . ~

l l

l

f'208160279 820722

PDR ADOCK 05000528 l 0 PDR RV Fom 219 (2)

.

.

DETAILS 1. Persons Contacted Arizona Public Service Company-(APS)

• G. C. Andognini, Electric Operations Vice President W. B. Mc Lane, Startup Manager G. Pankonin, Startup Quality Assurance Manager W. Craig, Startup Quality Assurance Supervisor B. Solakiewicz, Document Control' Supervisor D. N. Willsey, Technical Support Supervisor P. Brandj es , Shift Test Group Supervisor Cotton, Operations Engineering Supervisor R. Burdick, Shift Test Coordinator A. Mc Cabe, Shift Supervisor P. Devine, Test Review Group Supervisor Bechtel Corporation

?

s A. Aversano, Quality Control Engineer

• Attended exit meeting

.

,

2. Licensee Actions on Previously~ Identified Items:

~

Housekeeping Noncompliance (82-09-01/ closed)

The applicant's written response (June 10,1982) to.the item of noncompliance was reviewed and considered satisfactory. The matter was addressed in a communication to site personnel. The specific areas of poor housekeeping have been cleaned and satisfac--

tory cleanliness is being maintaine . Reactor Coolant System Hydrostatic Test The inspectors observed selected portions of the reactor coola system hydrostatic test to_ verify that the test was conducted in accordance with the approved procedure. During the conduct of the test the inspector observed that the test procedure in use was the latest approved copy. Prior to commencing the test, the test director briefed the crew as to the conduct and precautions re-quired during the performance of the tes The inspector examined the log to verify that a chronological record of the progress of the test was being kep The inspector accompanied the authorized nuclear inspector, a 1 Bechtel QC repre~sentative, and an APS Startup QA representative to the official test gaug The gauge was verified to be in calibration with the requisite information of, calibration, date

, _

.

.

-2-verified, and date due on the sticker. The reactor coolant system was then pressurized to greater that 3115 psig, the required minimum test pressure, and held there for 10 minutes. Subsequent inspection at the 2500 psig plateau for weld integrity showed no -

indication of leakag No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie . Document Control A preliminary review of startup test records revealed additional actions are required by APS to finalize plans and procedures for the control of documents. APS efforts are currently in progress with assistance being obtained from an outside consultant. Currently completed test records are limited to prerequisite testing with the exception of a few completed preoperational test procedure Some of the matters requiring additional attention include the additional control of Bechtel generic procedures, the issuance of an APS procedure governing the control of completed test documents, and the final accounting and disposition of prerequisite test records submitted to the test review group for evaluatio Interim storage and retrievability of documents has not been a problem for the inspector to date; however, the controls lack the formality provided by program definition and implementation based on procedur No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie . Plant Tours

,

'

Several plant tours were conducted during the period. No instances of fire potential or fire fighting equipment damage were note Housekeeping has improved considerably in the auxiliary building and, while considered acceptable, has degraded somewhat in the containment building. These conditions were observed by APS QA personnel and corrective action was taken. Testing appeared to be accomplished in accordance with procedures. The monitoring of

process parameters -as well as -the observation of plant conditions l l

'

and equipment by operating personnel has expanded since the com- i pletion of the reactor coolant system hydrostatic test. No ,

instances of uncontrolled pipe openings, unauthorized work activi-ties or equipment abuses were'note Plant security has increased l significantly since completion of the reactor coolant system l hydrostatic test.

l A review of secondary system chemistry indicated slightly higher

than specified flourides for a short period of tim The condition

,

had been monitored closely and brought within' limit '

I

.

i

!

. - .

-

.-

-3-

,

No-items of noncompliance or deviations were note . Preventive Maintenance The inspector examined records and equipment to co'nfirm that the preventive maintenance' program is being implemented. During this examination the inspector verified that preventive maintenance was being conducted on equipment required for support of the reactor coolant system hydrostatic test. 'This equipment included the re-actor coolant pumps, low pressure safety injection purps and the charging pump Maintenance personnel have regularly checked lub- '

ricant levels and replenished lubricants. The-appearance of the equipment does not exhibit any condition indicative of detoriation of or hazard to the equipmen No items of noncompliance or deviations were note . Preoperational Test Procedure Review The initial draft of the main steam isolation valve preoperational test procedure was reviewed for technical content, conformance to regulatory requirements and consistency with administrative controls governing procedure development, review and approval. The inspector noted several instances where systems components were not being tested to confirm FSAR descriptions of component 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 procedure No items of noncompliance or deviations were note . Exit Meeting An exit meeting was held with Mr. C. Andognini on July 15, 1982, at which time the findings of the inspection were 7 resented. The inspector was briefed on a proposed organization change within the startup unit. The change is intended to improve the efficiency i

of system turnovers and the management of outstanding construction item i i

b