IR 05000275/1980009
| ML16341B366 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 05/02/1980 |
| From: | Bagaglio M, Sternberg D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16340B037 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-275-80-09, 50-275-80-9, NUDOCS 8006130067 | |
| Download: ML16341B366 (6) | |
Text
U.
S.
f1UCLEAR REGULATORY COt~ii'1ISS ION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION fiNO ENFORCEHEflT
REGION V
Report No.
50-. 275/80-09 Doc1;et No.
50-275 License No CPPR-39 Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street San Francisco, California 94106 Safeguard@
Group Facility Name:
Diablo Canyon Unit
Diablo Canyon Site, San Luis Obispo County, California Inspecu on Conducted:
Inspectors:
H. J; aga April 15-17, 1980 cto Inspector a e Signed k
Approved. by:
D.
. Sternberg, Chief, ~actor Project Section Pl, Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch.
D te Signed Summary:
Ins ection. on A ril 15-17, 1980 Re ort No. 50-275/80-09)
Areas Ins ected:
Routine, unannounced inspection "of preoperational test program, ollowup of -outstanding. items and a tour of the facility.
This
.inspection involved 23 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- R. Ramsay, Plant Superintendent
- J. Diamonon, guality Control Supervisor
- M. Horem, Resident Startup Engineer D. Backens, Supervisor of Maintenance
- J. Gisclon, Power Plant Engineer
~A. Hardy, guality Control Inspector
- C. Seward, gual.ity Assurance Engineer R. Hanninga, Power Production Engineer The inspector also talked with and interviewed other licensee employees, including members of the construction, engineering and operations staff and gC organization personnel.
- Denotes those attending the exit interview on April 17, 1980.
2.
Prep erational Test Pro ram The inspector reviewed seven preoperational tests that had been reviewed by the PSRC:
1.6 3.1 3.1 4.3 8.3.3 8.4. 2 9.3 RCS Chemistry Addition and Control Motor Driven Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps Initial Startup Addendum
Main Steam Safety Valves Set Point and Blowdown Verification Boric Acid Addition and Control Performance Demonstration Boric Acid Addition and Control Safety Injection System Preoperational Test Evaluation of the recorded data by the inspector revealed the following finding:
In test procedure 8.3.3.,
Boric Acid Addition and Control, the combined flowrate for both Boric Acid Transfer Pumps operating in fast speed was 92.8 gallons per minute (gpm).
This value is significantly below the 150 gpm capacity stated in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
The inspector verified that the observed flowrate for both BA Transfer Pumps (operating in fast speed)
had been transmitted to the HSSS vendor and that the vendor response stated that the observed flowrate was satisfactory without any basis or explanation.
The inspector requested and the licensee committed to obtain from the HSSS vendor the basis for accepting the existing condition.
This is an open item to be followed up on during a
future inspection (80-09-01).
There were no items of noncompliance or deviation Diablo Canyon Unit
-2-Fol 1 owu of Outs tandin Items The inspector conducted discussions with licensee representatives on two outstanding items with the following findings:
(Closed)
Unresolved Item (275/80-03-03):
Failure to set the Boron Injection Tank (BIT) Low Flow Alarm in accordance with the NSSS recommendation.
The inspector and licensee representative reviewed the preoperational test package and the licensee's Precautions, Limitations, and Setpoint (PLS) document.
Although data in the test package is ambiguous in that it infers that 9 +
1 gpm should be the low flow alarm setting, in fact the NSSS vendor has demonstrated that 90Ã of normal BIT recirculation flow is an acceptable set point.
The licensee has properly set the BIT recirculation low flow alarm.
(Open) Unresolved Item (275/80-03-02):
Failure to identify permanently installed instrumentation in pr eoperational tests used to record data and failure to account for inaccuracies of permanently installed instrumentation in evaluating preoperational test results.
Based upon discussion with a licensee representative, it was not the original intent of the licensee procedures to identify in test
'rocedures permanently installed instrumentation used to record data.
Subsequent to discussions with the inspector, the licensee stated that identification of permanently installed instrumentation in test procedures will now be required if the instrumentation is to be used to record test data.
In addition, the licensee committed to review and evaluate preoperational test data obtained from permanently installed instrumentation to verify acceptability of test results.
The licensee indicated that the results of this y'eyiew would be summarized in a written report.
Pending receipt of the. licensee's evaluation of test data, this item will remain open.
There were no items of noncompliance or deviations.
Plant Tour The inspector conducted a tour of the Unit 1 facility.
Housekeeping and cleanliness of Unit 1 appeared consistent with"co'nstruction'ctivities and fire and safety requirements.
Much of the equipment and staging inside the containment for Unit
has been removed.
There were no items of noncompliance or deviations.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1)
on April 17, 1980.
The scope and findings of the inspection were summarized by the inspecto l~