IR 05000275/1978020
| ML16340A357 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 12/28/1978 |
| From: | Morrill P, Sternberg D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16340A356 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-275-78-20, 50-323-78-18, NUDOCS 7902010337 | |
| Download: ML16340A357 (16) | |
Text
50-275/78-20 Report No.
50-323 78-18 Docket No,50-275 5 50-323 U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AViD ENFORCEHEiVT
REGION V
License No. CPPR-39, CPPR-69 safeguards Group Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street San Francisco, California 94106 Facipity Name Diablo Canyon Units 1 and
Inspection at:
Diablo Canyon Site, San Luis Obispo County, California Inspection co ducted:
December-8, 1978 Inspectors:
P.
J Norrill, Reac or Inspector Da e Signed Date Signed Approved By:
S er erg, Chic,, Reactor Project Section
D. N.~
Summary:
Reac4]r Operanons and Nuclear Support Branch Date Signed
/z g
/Date igned Ins ection on December 6-8, 1978 Re ort Hos. 50-275/78-20 and 50-323/78-18 A~Id:
R P,
dd p
d Pp p
testing, evaluation and ve} ification of test results, and a tour of the facility.
This inspection involved 16 inspector hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
~so2 o zopf~
RV Form 219 (2)
r.
P
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- R. Ramsay, Plant Superintendent
- R. Patterson, Supervisor of Operations
- M. Coley, Startup Engineer, Unit 1, g.C.
- R. Taylor, guality Assurance Engineer
- J. Diamonon, guality Control Supervisor J. Shiffer, Power Plant Engineer M. Leppke, guality Assurance Supervisor M. Norem, Resident Startup Engineee The inspector also talked with and interviewed several other licensee employees, including members of the construction, engi-n'eering and operations staffs and gA organization personnel.
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
2.
Prep erational Test Pro ram The inspector examined one Unit 1 preoperational test procedure package that had been turned over from the construction organization to the operating organization.
The package was found to contain the proper documentation of test results review and approval, and resolution of test deficiencies and problems which occurred during the testing phase.
The test result reviewed was as follows:
No. 3. 1, Addenda 81, Motor Driven Aux Feed Pumps No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
3.
Plant Tour The inspector toured the facility and made the following observations:
a.
Unit 1'systems and components were in a lay up status as a
result of the suspended preoperational test program.
b.
Housekeeping and cleanliness in both Units 1 and 2 appeared consistent with construction activities and applicable fire and safety requirements.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
Exit Interview I
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Para-graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on December 8, 1978.
The scope and findings of the inspection were summarized by the inspecto cg II II<00+
P0
- .'>~JllllldP
++*++
~
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
SUITE 202, WALNUTCREEK PLAZA 1990 N. CALIFORNIA BOULEVARD WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94590 JUL 27 Bi0 Docket Nos. 50-275
50-323 Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street San Francisco, California 94106 Attention:
Mr. Philip A. Crane, Jr.
Assistant General Counsel Gentlemen:
Subject:
NRC Inspection of Diablo Canyon Units 1 and
This refers to the inspection conducted by Messrs.
M. H. Malmros, T. Young, Jr.,
and P. J. Morrill of this office on July 20-21, 1978 of activities authorized by Construction Permits Nos.
CPPR-39 and CPPR-69, and to the discussion of our findings held by Mr. Malmros with Mr. Ramsay and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
Areas examined during this inspection are described in the enclosed inspection report.
Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, inter-views with personnel, and observations by the inspectors.
No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified within the scope of this inspection.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice,"
Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room. If this report contains any information that you believe to be proprietary, it is necessary that you submit a written application to this office, within 20 days of the date of this letter, requesting that such information be withheld from public disclosure.
The applica-tion must include a full statement of the reasons why it is claimed that the information is proprietary.
The application should be prepared so that any proprietary information'dentified is contained in an enclosure
~
.
-
Pacific Gas and Electric Company-2-to the application, since the application without the enclosure will also be placed in the Public Document Room. If we do not hear from you in this regard within the specified period, the report will be placed in the Public Document Room.
Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be glad to discuss them with you.
Sincerely,
Enclosure:
IE Inspection Report No. 50-275/78-11 50-323/78-11
/QIERr'ebs, Chief eactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch
REGION V==
License No CPPR-39, CPPR-69 Safeguards Group Licensee:
Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street San Francisco, California 94106 Faci1ity Name'iablo Canyon Units
and
Inspection at Dia bl o Canyon Si te.
San Luis Obi sPo County, Cal ifornia Inspection conducted:
'3uly 20-21~
1978 Inspectors:
M. H. Malmros, Reactor Inspector Da Signed T
Young, Jr.,
ac or n
ector te igned Approved By:
Summary:
P.
p or ig, Reactor Inspector J.
L.
re s, Chief, Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch ate Signed D
e Signed Ins ection on Jul 20-21 1978 Re ort Nos.
50-275 78-11 and 50-323 78-11 td:
t t,dt p
t tpp testing, evaluation and verification of test results, followup of previously identified items, IE Bulletin and Circular followup, and a tour of the facility.
This inspection involved 36 inspector hours onsite by three NRC inspectors.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
RV Form 219 (2)
- Q
DETAILS Persons Contacted
- R. Ramsay, Plant Superintendent M. Tresler, Project Superintendent
- M. Norem, Resident Startup Engineer R. Etzler, Resident Mechanical Engineer M. Leppke, guality Assurance Supervisor
- J. Diamonon, guali ty Control Supervisor
- C. Schulze, Training Coordinator The inspectors also talked with and interviewed several other licensee employees, including members of the construction, engineering and operations staffs and gA organization personnel.
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
IE Bulletin/Circular Followu Bulletin 78-05:
The inspector found that the concerns expressed in the Bulletin were not applicable to the facility because GE Model CRl05X auxiliary contact mechanisms are not used or planned for use in safety-related circuit breakers at Diablo Canyon.
Circular 78-02:
The inspector found that the licensee used an acceptable lubricating oil with corrosion inhibiters consistent with the recommendations of the auxiliary feedwater pump turbine supplier.
Circular 78-04:
The concerns expressed in this Circular were not applicable to the design of fire door closing devices used in the facility..
Circular 78-06:
The inspector found that the licensee had addressed the concerns in the Circular during the design of facility equipment drains and floor drains.
Circular 78-07:
The inspector found that the type of hydraulic snubber test stand in use at the facility requires the use of ball bushings in the cross pin connection at the end of each strut.
This method of connecting the snubber to the test device assures that a true axial loading is applied when testing the snubbe Circular 78-09:
'he concerns expressed in this Circular were not applicable to the type of electrical contactors used in the facility switchgear.
No items of noncompliance, deviations or other concerns were identified.
3.
Prep erational Test Pro ram The inspectors examined three Unit 1 preoperational test procedure packages that had been turned over from the construction organization to the operating organization.
The packages were found to contain the proper documentation of test results review and approval, and resolution of test deficiencies and problems which occurred during the testing phase.
The test results reviewed were as follows:
No. 1.7 - Steam Generator Chemistry Addition and Control No. 3.9 - Steam Generator Water Hammer Test No. 8.4.2 -
Boric Acid Addition and Control System No items of'oncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
Plant Tour The inspectors toured the facility and made the following observations:
a.
Unit 1 systems and components were in a lay up status as a'esult of the suspended preoperational test program.
b.
Housekeeping and cleanliness in both Units 1 and 2 appeared consistent with construction activities and applicable fire and safety requirements.
c.
Onsite storage of nuclear fuel for both Units 1 and 2 was found consistent with the conditions of the facility license.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie.
0 erator Trainin Pro ram An examination of records and discussions with plant staff revealed that the operator requalification program as described in Chapter
of the FSAR was begun in July 1977.
From that time through March 1978, seven lectures and two reading assignments were given followed by tests.
In addition, an annual written examination was given along with an oral examination.
All recorded test results and the written exams were reviewed (for the thirteen cold license candidates)
by the inspector.
Ho items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Para-graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on July 21, 1978.
The scope and findings of the inspection were summarized by the inspector.