IR 05000275/1979025
| ML16340A772 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 12/26/1979 |
| From: | Sternberg D, Thomas Young NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16340A771 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-275-79-25, NUDOCS 8002010256 | |
| Download: ML16340A772 (6) | |
Text
U ~ S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
Report No.
Docket No.
50-275 License No.
CPPR-39 Safeguards Group Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street San Francisco, California 94106 Facility Name:
Diablo Can on Unit
Inspection at:
Diablo Canyon Site, San Luis Obispo County, California Inspection conduc d:
November 1-30 1979 Inspectors:
T.
You
~
r g, Jr.,
Re id fOuA-t Reactor Inspector i+ PI h Date Signed Approved By:
D.
N. Sternberg, Chief Reactor Project Section 1,
Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch Date Signed Date Signed r.
Date S gned Ins ection on November 1-30, 1979 Re ort No. 50-275/79-25
~A<<d:
i i
p i
fp p
i 1<<i,p p
testing gA, plant tour, preoperational test program controls, and witnessing of testing in progress.
This inspection involved 80 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC resident inspector.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
RV Form 219 (2)
80080'
~~+
DETAILS Persons Contacted R.
D.
Ramsay, Plant Superintendent
- R.
D. Etzler, Project Superintendent M.
R. Horem, Resident Startup Engineer
- C.
M. Seward, Acting gA Supervisor
- J.
S.
Diamonon, gC Supervisor
- J.
M. Gisclon, Power Plant Engineer
- D. A. Backons, Supervisor of Maintenance
- R. Patterson, Supervisor of Operations The inspector also talked with and interviewed a
number of other licensee employees including members of general construction, the operations staff and gA personnel.
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
Prep eration Test Pro ram Controls The inspector verified by record review and/or observation that (a) juris-diction controls were being observed for system turnover, (b) tagging was being accomplished consistent with jurisdictional controls of the adminis-trative procedures and (c) controls were being observed prior to and subsequent to testing.
A schedule is being maintained for preoperational
~ testing and updated when necessary.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
A for Preo erational Testin The inspector examined all gA audit reports of preoperational testing audits conducted within the last three months.
The inspector verified that the audits were conducted in accordance with approved procedures and that cor-rective actions for all identified discrepancies had been taken.
System turnover from construction to the startup test group and to the operations division was conducted in accordance with established procedures and administrative controls.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Plant Tour The inspector walked through various areas of the plant on a weekly basis to observe activities in progress; to inspect the general state of clean-liness, housekeeping and adherence to fire protection rules; to check the proper approval of "man on the line, caution and clearance" tags on equip-ment; and to review with operations personnel the status of various systems in the plan The inspector noted that the status of the systems and the housekeeping appeared consistent with construction activities.
The reactor cavity is still being maintained as a clean area and extra personnel are still assigned to cleanup crews.
Cleanliness and housekeeping of the plant is still improving.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Preo erational Testin a.
Portions of the following tests were witnessed by the inspector:
18.9 22. 7 23.1A1 25.6 26.3 34.1 Halon System Functional Test Turbine Runback Control System Test Test New Time Totalizer on Control Room Charcoal Filters Containment Class I Instrument Air Preoperational Tests of N Backup System Fuel Transfer System Functional Test b.
While witnessing the above testing (in some tests only parts of the tests were being performed or redone),
the inspector verified that the procedures were technically adequate; the latest revisions were available and approved; the overall crew performance was adequate and, in the case of completed tests, the acceptance criteria were met.
Administrative controls for design change and documentation were followed.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Exit Interview The inspector met with a senior licensee representative on a weekly basis and with the representative denoted in Paragraph
on November 30, 1979.
The scope and findings of the inspection were summarized by the inspecto I 4L, I
Ji