IR 05000275/1987022

Insp Rept 50-275/87-22 on 870520-22.Major Areas Inspected: Followup on Allegation File Number RV-87-A-0094 & Followup on Regional Open Items List

ML20235E344
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	06/23/1987
From:	Fish R, Prendergast K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML16342B351	List: IR 05000275/1987022
References
50-275-87-22, NUDOCS 8707110007
Download: ML20235E344 (3)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ - __

.

t U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION V

Report No. 50-275/87-22 License No. DPR-80 Docket No. 50-275 Licensee: Pacific Gas and Electric Company k 77 Beale Street San Francisco, California 94106 Facility: Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 Inspection at: Diablo Canyon Site, San Luis Obispo County, C Inspection Conducted: May 20-22, 1987 ,

Inspector: d b .f # 6/n/r 7 K. M. Prendergast *

Date Si'gned Emergency Preparedness Analyst Approved By: t hchSMb [2/23/f'/

R. F. Fish, Chief Date Signed Emergency Preparedness Section i Sunrnary:

Inspection on May 20-22, 1987 (Report No. 50-275/87-22)

Areas Inspected: Followup on allegation file number RV-87-A-0094 and followup on regional open items list. NRC inspection procedures 92702 and 92705 were covere Results: No significant deficiencies or violations of NRC requirements were identifie I

.

8707110007 Bhp 0275 PDR ADOCK 0 PDR G

,

_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

.

DETAILS Persons Contacted

• J. Townsend, Plant Superintendent

• C. Cox, Emergency Planner J. Schmitz, Emergency Planner D. Bell, Quality Assurance Supervisor W. White, Training Instructor Note: * indicates those attending exit interview Action On Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Open Item No. 86-06-02: Failure to complete annual training requirements. A review of the licensee's March 31, 1986 response to our February 28, 1986 Notice of Violation was performed. Based upon this review and an examination of training records, it appears the licensee has taken appropriate corrective action as described in their March 31, 1986 correspondence to ensure emergency response personnel receive required training. A review of the training records for all Shift Foreman and Shift Technical Advisors revealed the training for these positions was satisfactorily completed in all instance In addition, a review of the licensee's administrative procedure for training (AP-8-50) showed that the procedure had been revised to specify satisfactory completion of required training is necessary prior to entry into the plant protected area. This item is considered close (Closed) Open Item No. 85-45-01: Failure to maintain emergency kits. A review of the licensee's March 31, 1986 response to our February 28, 1986 Notice of Violation was performed. Based upon this review, it appears that the licensee has taken the corrective action described in their March 31, 1986 correspondence to insure maintenance of the plant emergency kits. A physical inventory of the emergency kits and the emergency lockers located in the Technical Support Center (TSC) and the Training Building was performed. The inventory showed that the contents of the kits and the lockers in the TSC were maintained as required and that both of the kits located in the Training Building were sealed to prevent tampering. In addition, an examination of the inventory records for the emergency kits for 1986 and 1987 was performed. The examination showed timely and complete inventories had been performed. No problems were observed. This item is considered close . Follow-up on Allegation RV-87-A-0018 Characterization During a site emergency, the assembly areas for construction personnel are located in the predominantly downwind area adjacent to the plan Consequently, a release of harmful vapors such as chlorine or radioactive materials from the plant may be detrimental I to personnel located in the assembly areas.

l l

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

l

. '

.

i l Inspection Follow-up l

!

The follow-up inspection on this allegation consisted of the following activities: interviews with the concerned employee, interviews with emergency planning personnel, an examination of the Emergency Plan and related implementing procedures, an examination of calculated exposure rates provided by the licensee for accidents analyzed in the Final Safety Analysis Report, a comparison of the exposure estimates provided by the licensee and NRC calculated exposure rates using the NRC Interactive Rapid Dose Assessment model (IRDAM) and interviews with plant managemen The review of the Emergency Plan and the interviews with the Plant Superintendent disclosed that the licensee has provisions in the Emergency Plan, should it be deemed necessary by the Site Emergency Coordinator, to assemble personnel in areas other than the normal assembly area The Plant Superintendent stated that, if the assembly areas are considered unsafe for plant assembly, instructions to assemble in other areas such as to the north or east of the plant would be given over the plant public address syste The Plant Superintendent also stated that the capability to assemble in areas other than the normal assembly areas will be clarified in the implementing procedures to insure all personnel are aware of this capability. The revision to the implementing procedures that addresses assembling outside of the normal assembly area will be evaluated during a subsequent inspectio In addition to the inspection performed on this allegation, a review of the licensee's " Quality Hotline" was performed with respect to the above stated concern. Discussions with the Quality Assurance supervisor for the " Quality Hotline" and a review of the documentation relating to the above stated concern determined that the " Quality Hotline" had transmitted the concern to appropriate members of plant management for response and resolution. The responses to the concerned individual were made by qualified '

individuals and at least two attempts were made to resolve the concern. The licensee appears to have an excellent program for resolving or addressing concerns expressed by Diablo Canyon personne . Exit Interview An exit interview was held at the conclusion of this inspection for the purpose of discussing the preliminary findings. Licensee representatives present at this meeting are identified in Paragraph 1 of this repor There were no violations of NRC requirements identified within the scope of this inspectio Other items discussed during this meeting are described in Sections 2 and 3 of this repor l l

l 1