IR 05000275/1982004
| ML20041F461 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 02/25/1982 |
| From: | Garcia E, North H, Wenslawski F NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20041F453 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737, TASK-2.B.3, TASK-2.F.1, TASK-TM 50-275-82-04, 50-275-82-4, 50-323-82-04, 50-323-82-4, NUDOCS 8203160523 | |
| Download: ML20041F461 (6) | |
Text
,
t
,
'
.
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULA0RY COMMISSION
REGION V
50-275/82-04 Report No. 50-323/82-04 50-275 DPR-76 Docket No. 50-323 License No. CPPR-69 Safeguards Group Licensee:
Pacific Gas and Electric Company P. O. Box 7442 San Francisco, California 94106 Facility Name:
Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 Inspection at:
San Luis Obispo County, California Inspection conducted:
February 1-5, 1982 Inspectors:
JF/
2 /25//2.
E. M.'Garcia, Radiation Specialist Date Signed O
V H. S.' North,~ Radiation Specialist D&te signed 2/2ft/FA Approved by:
u,_a D'te $igned F. A. Wenslawski, Chief, Reactor Radiation a
Prot tion Sec ion Approved by:
A*
2I
-
H. E. Book, Chief, Radiological Safety Branch Date Signed Sunmary:
,
Inspection on February-1-5, 1982 (Report No. 50-275/82-04 and 50-323/82-04)
Area Inspected: Ra'diation protection organizatio'n, sta'ffing and training, general employee training, procedures, instrument calibration, preoperational
,
.
testing, NUREG-0737 Conditions, byproduct and SNM licenses and a facility tour. This inspection involved ~65 inspector-hours onsite by two inspectors.
Results: Of the ten areas" inspected no items'of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
,
8203160523 820225 DR ADOCK 05000275 PDR s
,
--
%
I
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Station Staff
- R. Thornberry, Plant Manager W. Kaefer, Technical Assistant
- R. Patterson, Plant Superintendent J. Sexton, Supervisor of Operations J. Boots, Supervisor, Chemistry and Radirition Protection (C&RP)
- W. O'Hara, Senior C&RP Engineer (E)
H. Fong, C&RPE A. Taylor, C&RPE D. Unger, C&RPE L. Vulchev, Solid Radwaste Foreman M. Creath, C&RP Technician
- J. Giscoln, Power Plant Engineer (PPE)
,
,
-
W. Coley, Senioi Construction Engineer
'
-
B. LeConte, Field. Engineer!
- '
'
.;
,
,-,
,
(* Denotes those present at the, exit ' int'erview)
,
a
-
.
.-
.
..
..m 2.
C&RP - Organization, Staffing and Trainina, -
s
- -
,'
.
,.
,
.
.s IE Inspection Report'5'0-275/81-16,ip' ara'.gr'ap'h'2, described the C&RP organization. The present' organization;a'nd staffing is as shown on the chart.
'
,
i SC YO
}
A g
im eml I
,
_ _7_
,
,
Sii""Ei of.%L JNron cdl%Irf m m m
m m o I
I nor m.,1 s,-
Ufill Ej ltiiji
{ii'iti
_ q" **%
,.y#
d"' ~ ~ m >
......,
'
m
,
mn m'"'*m j
Ol Ciib$UI
"
l0 :l*2lll;" 7;' Nd; C
.
- - -,
- - - -
--
- ___ -
..
. _ _ _ _ _.
.
I
.
.
.
-2-Fifteen of the 21 C&RPT's on staff are qualified to ANSI /ANS 18.1 criteria. C&RPT shift staffing of three has been authorized.
Technicians are presently working shifts but at a level of two per shift because of the lower work load at this time.
Systems training provided to C&RPTs was discussed with the C&RPE responsible for training.
Forty to sixty hours of training in this area plus approximately 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br /> of tours is provided to nu staff members.
Other training in addition to that discussed in IE Inspection Report No. 50-275/81-16, includes seminars concerning procedure updates and new equipment and a 20-30 hours of training in Power Plant and Corrosion Chemistry.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
'
3.
General Employee Trainino
,
,
The procedure addressing this: topic, Administrative-Procedure B-2, General Requirements'for Training ^of On-Site Personnel, is being revised.
The licensee reported that 88% of,the required initial and 59% of required retraining has been c'ompletedh The emphasis has been placed on initial training in the recent"past but is being
'
shifted to retrain.ing.'4
'
,.
.,,
,
<
3,
.
,,
No items of nonc'ompliance were ident[ifiedl
~ ^
(
r a
c
.
'
'
'
4.
Procedures
,
>
IE Inspection Report No. ~ 50-275/81-16, paragraph 4, identified three procedures selected for review-prior to-fuel load which remained outstanding; A-4 Chemistry Laboratory Calibration Schedule, A-6 Gaseous Radwaste Discharge Management, G-ll Packaging, Storace and Inventory of Solid Radioactive Waste.- The inspector reviewec. the procedures and verified that all were complete, and had been approved by the PSRC.
l The licensee has established a procedure, AP E-4 SS Development and l
Verification of Technical Calculations and Calculator or Computer Programs.
The procedure scope states in part:
" Calculations and computer / calculator programs which are themselves part of, or which are bases for testing, analysis, calibration, t
operating, maintenance and other procedures which are important to l
safety.or important to environmental quality'and revisions thereto l
shall be subject to the requirements of this procedure. While not mandatory for. procedures not important to safety (e.g., turbine efficiency), good engineering practice requires that that this procedure i
be applied in all cases were practicable."
l I
'
,
.
'
.
.
v-3-
-
At the time of the inspection the Chemistry and Radiation Protection group was beginning the' verification process as it~ applies to their activities.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Area, Process and Effluent Monitor Calibration-IE Inspection Report No. 50-275/81-16, paragraph 5, discussed instrument calibrations, procedures and procedure approval status. Of the FSAR monitors which had not been calibrated at that time,1-R-25 and 1-R-26, Control Room Ventilation Intake monitors have been calibrated, procedures prepared and approved by the PSRC. All calibration procedures for FSAR identified monitors, previously identified as having been reviewed in draft form, have been approved by the PSRC. At the time of the inspection only 1-R-24, Plant Vent Iodine monitor of the FSAR identified monitors remained uncalibrated. The licensee expected to accomplish the calibration of this monitor during the next few weeks.
Due to time limitations the calibration status of non FSAR identified monitors was not discussed.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
6.
Preoperational Testing The status of preoperational tests selected for review was examined.
In those cases where preoperational tests had been completed, approved and accepted by operations, test results were examined to assure that the test results were within the previously established acceptance criteria and, where applicable, deviations from acceptance criteria were properly identified and disposed in accordance with the licensee's administrative procedures. The following tests have been completed and accepted by operations:
Test No.
Title'and Ccmments 19.4 Spent Filter Transfer System The test verified the operability of this system which is designed to minimized personnel exposures.
The system was found to function as designed. The inspectors noted that as a result of certain design
features, i.e. requirement for replacement of "0" ring filter housing to filter element seals in the base of the filter housing and the presence of an undrained and unflushed space at the bottom of-the filter housing certain aspects of maintenance may involve increased personnel exposures in the future. These concerns were identified to the licensee's radiation protection and management organizations during the inspection.
.
.P
_
_
_.
.
.
.
.
.
-4-23.1 Addendum 3 Diesel Exhaust Effect on Control Room Pressurization System Levels of N0 and CO were measured in the
control room and found to be acceptable.
38.4 Radiation Monitoring System The test verified the operability of the FSAR identified systems including operation of indicators, alarms, automatic functions, agreement between console, recorder and remote indicators and response to the contained check sources. System calibrations were performed under surveillance test procedures.
Unit 1 preoperational tests selected for review which remain incomplete or not accepted by operations, at the time of this inspection include:
<
Test No.
Title 1.1 Startup Water Chemistry Requirements 19.2.12 Flush and Preop. Spent Resin System
,
,
23.1 Main Control Room Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning System 23.1 Addendum 2 Control Room PEessurization System 23.3
. Auxiliary and Fuel Handli,ng Building Ventilation
.
'Preopj Test
-
-
No'itemsofnonc'omhliancewereidentified.
.
7.
NUREG-0737 Conditions License No. DPR-76 in Section 2'.C,(8) NUREG-0737 Conditions, specified
. completion dates of January 1, 1982 for items h. Post Accident Sampling (Section II.B.3) and k. Additional Accident Monitoring Instrumentation (Section II.F.1).
The licensee requested and was granted by letter dated December'31, 1981, 5xtention of the completion dates. The letter stated that the license should be amended and a new condition added to each item which states that: "an implementation date for this item will be established by the NRC prior to fuel loading in Unit 1."
No items of noncompliance were identified.
.
_.
.
-. -
.. -.
.
.
.
.
-
8.
Inspections of Byproduct and SPM Licenses Inspections of byproduct material license 04-08134-03 and Special Nuclear Material licenses SNM-1503 and SNM-1667'which authorize possession and use of radioactive materials in various forms for specific purposes ~ and the receipt and possession of Unit 1 and 2 reactor No items of noncompliance were identified with fuel were conducted.
c respect to the three' licenses and forms NRC-591' reflecting these findings were presented to the, licensee at,the donclusion of the inspection.
.
,
,.
,
'
'
9.
Facility Tour-
-
- u,
,.;
,t
<
.
.
.
.
The inspectors to'ured portions ao'.the turbine,:a'ux'iliary and fuel f
~
'
handling buildings'during the inspectioni Special attention was directed to the liquid, gaseous and solid, radioactive waste processing and storage. facilities and the process and effluent monitoring system.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
10.
Exit Interview At the conclusion of the inspection' the inspection findings were sunnarized for those individuals denoted in paragraph 1.
The licensee was advised that no items of noncompliance had been identified.
,
-