IR 05000275/1990001
| ML16342C364 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 04/02/1990 |
| From: | Martin J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | Shiffer J PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16341F654 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9004200458 | |
| Download: ML16342C364 (8) | |
Text
4E0I Pp
)
I ct
- de 4 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COINIVILSSlON
REGION V
1450 MARIALANE,SUITE 210 WALNUTCREE I4 CALIFORNIA94595 P,PR - 2 19M Docket Nos.
50-275 and 50-323 QCl (
Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, Room 1451 San Francisco, California 94106 Attention:
Mr. J.
D. Shiffer, Senior Vice President and General Manaoer Nuclear Power Generation SUBJECT:
NRC Inspection of Diablo Canyon Units 1.and
Gentlemen:
This refers to the special, announced inspection conducted by Messrs.
P.
H. Johnson, P.
M. gualls, J.
F. Burdoin, R.
G. Gilbert, and J.
F. Ringwald of this office; R. L. Prevatte of the NRC Region II office; and consultants R. S.
Hodor and K. Sullivan on January 8 - 12 and on January 22 through February 2, 1990 of activities authorized by NRC License Nos.
DPR-80 and DPR-82, and to the discussion of our findings held with you and other members of the PGSE staff on February 2, 1990.
Ins ection Overview The inspection conducted by the team was primarily a review of your correc-tive actions program and an assessment of its effectiveness in initiating, tracking, and ensuring proper completion of appropriate corrective actions for identified deficiencies.
The team also assessed the effectiveness of the oversight groups involved in the corrective actions program, as well as your System Engineer and Design System Engineer programs.
One team member also conducted an inspection of your emergency lighting systems.
As part of this assessment, team members were assigned to review various plant systems.
In-plant walkdowns of these systems were conducted, and specific issues related to them were identified for use in assessing the effectiveness of the corrective actions program.
The team also conducted numerous interviews and reviewed a wide selection of plant records to identify issues requiring corrective action.,
T~Fi di Certain strengths were noted in your corrective actions program, in that the team identified no conditions requiring corrective action for which an action was not initiated.
Corrective actions initiated for safety-significant problems were also considered by the team to have been completed in a timely and effective manner.
However, the team identified the following concerns regarding other aspects of your program:
Several examples were observed involving poor control of temporary changes to approved procedures, as addressed in Violation A of the cypp4ppp458 9pp4p2 PDR
@DOCK P
@AU
~
'
enclosed Notice.~
With regard Co this issue, we are concerned that effective corrective action.had. not been taken in response to similar items identified by your guality Assurance audits in.1988 and 1989.
- Several corrective actions of minor individual safety significance had been open for several months to a few years.
In addition, although trending reports prepared by your facility staff showed the total number of open action requests to:be increasing, no.person or group within your organization was responsible for driving the resolution or closure of action items.
Most plant System Engineers (SEs)
and Design System Engineers (DSEs)
were found to be well qualified and actively involved in issues dealing with their assigned systems.
However., weaknesses were observed in some aspects of these programs, which were initiated, in part, as corrective action for previously identified weakness in the plant/corporate inter-face.
These included insufficient definition of SE/DSE training and qualification criteria, weaknesses in guidance regarding SE/DSE responsibilities, lack of access of some DSEs to the power plant site, and weakness in some SE/DSE interfaces.
Plant housekeeping conditions were considered by the team to have decIined.
Additional summary inspection findings are provided in the ResuIts section, immediately following the cover sheet of the enclosed inspection report.
Based upon discussions at the conclusion of the inspection, we understand that you are planning additional actions to address the above concerns.
We consider your corrective action and system engineer programs to have a
significant potential positive impact on overall plant performance, and encourage their continued development.
Based on the results of the inspection, it appears that certain of your activities were not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements, as set forth in the Notice of Violation, enclosed herewith as Appendix A.
Your response to this Notice is to be submitted in accordance with the provisions stated in the Notice.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.791(a),
a copy of this letter and the enclosures will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
The responses directed by this letter and the attached Notice are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paper work Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-51 Should you have any.questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
S'ely, ohn B. Martin Regional Administrator Enclosures:
1.
.Appendix A -- Notice of Violation 2.
Inspection Report Nos. 50-275/90-01, 50-323/90-01.
cc w/enclosures:
J.
A. Sexton, PG&E R.
F. Locke, PG&E J.
D. Townsend, PG&E (Diablo Canyon)
D. A. Taggert, PG&E (Diablo Canyon)
T. L. Grebel, PG&E (Diablo Canyon)
State of California Sandra Silver (Report Only)
bcc w/ enclosures:
Project Inspector Resident Inspector Docket file J. Martin B. Faulkenberry G.
Cook A. Johnson R. Zimmerman A. Chaffee R. Huey A. Toth bcc w/o enclosure 2:
J. Zollicoffer N. Western H. Smith R
N P3'/90 JBurdoi 3/g4/9 RGilb t P
t 3P.p/
3/94/90 FRingwald 3/>5'/90 ST COPY ES /
NO COPY REQUEST Y
ES /
YES /
REQUE T COPY EST COPY YES /
NO ES /
NO P
non 3/2 &
'AQ MMendonca uey DKirgch Rjimmerman 3/~/90
90 3/Q /90 8/ i /90 YES EST COPY
/
NO T COPY REQ ES OPY REQUEST Y
REQUEST Y
SJ NO YE
/
N YES /
NO YES /
NO AJohn on 3/Q/
REQUEST YES /
in
+/2 /90 REQUEST COPY YES /
NO SEND PDR YES NO
0