ML16340A287
| ML16340A287 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 10/16/1978 |
| From: | Sternberg D, Sternberg D, Thomas Young NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16340A288 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-275-78-14, NUDOCS 7811220267 | |
| Download: ML16340A287 (26) | |
See also: IR 05000275/1978014
Text
U. S,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
50-275/78-14
Report No.
50-323/78-14
REGION V
Docket No.
50-275,
50-323
License No. CPPR-39,
CPPR-69
Safeguards
Group
Licensee:
Pacific Gas
and Electric
Com an
77 Beale Street
San Francisco,
94106
Facility Name:
Diablo Can
on Units
1
5 2
Inspection at:
Diablo Canyon Site,
San Luis Obis
o Count, California
Inspection
c
Inspectors:
T.
ucted:
Se tember 1-30,
1978
Young. Jr., Resident
Reac or Inspector
lO
Ig
Date Signed
e
Approved By:
Date Signed
Date Signed
te
)6 7
Summary:
D.
N. Sternberg,
Chief,
e ctor Projects
Section
81,
Reactor Operations
and Nuclear Support
Branch
Date Signed
Ins ection
on Se tember 1-30,
1978
Re ort Nos. 50-275/78-14
and
50-323/78-14
A~d:
R
i
i
p
i
fp
p
i 1<<ig,f
storage,
followup on licensee
event,
IE Bulletin-Circular followup and
witnessing of testing in progress.
This inspection involved 120
inspector-hours
onsite
by one
NRC resident inspector.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations
were identified.
RV Form 219 (2)
+ l4f T.
$
A ( gl
O.
DETAILS
1.
Persons
Contacted
- R. D.
Ramsay,
Plant Superintendent
R.
D. Etzler, Project Superintendent
- H. N. Norem, Resident Startup
Engineer
- H. E. Leppke,
gA Supervisor
- J. S.
Diamonon,
gC SuperVisor
R. Patterson,
Supervisor of Operations
- D. A. Backens,
Supervisor of Maintenance
- J. M. Gisclon,
Power Plant Engineer
The inspector also talked with and interviewed
a number of other
licensee
employees,
including members of the construction engineering
and operations staffs
and
gA organization
personnel.
- Denotes those attending
the exit interview.
2.
~0
Hr.
H. J.
Maloney has retired
and Hr. C.
P. Schulze
has replaced
him as Relief Shift Supervisor.
Mr. M. R. Tresler
has
been reas-
signed to the corporate offices in San Francisco
and Hr.
R.
D. Etzler
has replaced
him as Project Superintendent.
Mr. L. Killpack
replaced
Mr. Etzler as Resident
Mechanical
Engineer.
3.
IE Bulletin and Circular Followu
The information provided in the licensee's
response
to IE Bulletin
Nos.
78-06 and 78-10 was verified by the inspector.
The information
contained in IE Circular Nos. 78-03,
05,
15 and
16 was discussed
with a licensee
representative.
Bulletin 78-06:
The licensee is planning to replace approximately ten Cutler-
Hammer Type
D23MRQ relays with Type
D26MRD used in safety
related cir'cuits by October 1, 1978.
The results will be
examined
subsequent
to the replacement of these relays.
Bulletin 78-10:
The inspector
found that the concerns
expressed
in the bulletin
were not applicable to the facility because
no Bergen-Paterson
hydraulic shock suppressors
are
used or held as spares.
.
O.
Circular 78-03:
The Plant Staff Review Committee
(PSRC)
has reviewed this
circular and proposed
to revise Radiation Control Standard
No. 6, "Control of Radioactive Materials," to address
the
differences
between
and
DOT 49
CFR 170-189 to pre-
clude packaging greater
than Type A quantities of low specific
activity radioactive material for transport offsite.
Circular 78-05:
The
PSRC
has reviewed the contents of this circular and pro-
posed
to add
a precaution to Operating
Procedure
L-5 "Plant
Cooldown from Minimum Load to Cold Shutdown," to warn operators
that inadvertent safety injection during cooldown
may result
due to low pressure
in the steam line from one of the steam
generators.
Circular 78-15 and 78-16:
Circulars
78-15 and 78-16 have
been received onsite
and have
been
added to the agenda of the next regularly scheduled
PSRC
meeting.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
4.
Licensee
Event Fol 1owu
The licensee
reported this occurrence
(low level in spent fuel
pool) by telephone
on June
15.
1978 to Region
Y and by written
report to Region
V on July 21, 1978.
Nonconformance
Report No. 06
was
examined
by the inspector.
The
NRC requires
the as-build
drawing
be corrected
to reflect the as-built condition of the air
supply to the inflatable seal
between
the spent fuel pool
and the
fuel transfer canal.
Subsequently
on August 18, 1978,
Amendment
No.
6 to license
SNM-
1503 was issued.
This amendment
drops the requirement that new
fuel
be stored
under borated water.
This item is considered
closed.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
5.
Safet
In 'ection Si nal Reset Feature
TI2515 14
Operating
Procedure
No.
"Loss of Coolant Accident," under
subsequent
operator actions,
step
A4 requires
the operator to reset
the SIS when the timer times out (approximately
60 seconds).
Step
A6 requires that the diesel
generators
be shutdown if offsite power
is available.
A note warns what will happen
and what operator
action is required if offsite power is subsequently
lost.
-3-
At Diablo Canyon there is
no specific operator
actions required
prior to SIS reset to prevent any equipment from moving out of its
emergency
mode when the SIS is reset.
Upon initiation of an SIS,
the
ESF equipment automatically start
and lock-in the running mode.
so operator action is required to shut down
ESF equipment.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
wer'e identified.
Re ulator
Guide 1.68.2
The contents of the requirements
of RG 1.68.2 were discussed
with
the Resident Startup
Engineer.
A decision is yet to be made
whether the test procedure
"Plant shutdown from outside the main
,control
room" will be rewritten to meet the
new requirements.
This
item will remain
open until that decision is made.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
Hew Fuel Stora
e
The new fuel storage
in Units I and II was inspected;
The in-
spector verified that the integrity of the security controls were
being maintained
and adequate
procedures
were available
and enforced.
Environmental
protection to control dust and debr is and to prevent
fuel damage
was being maintained.
The inspector ascertained
that
the requirements
of both special
nuclear materials licenses
were
being met.
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 cleanliness,
housekeeping
and adherence
to fire protection
rules; to check the proper approval of "Man on the Line, Caution
and Clearance"
tags
on equipment,
and to review with operators
the
status of various
systems
in the plant.
The inspector
noted that the status of the systems
and the house-
keeping in both units appeared
consistent with construction activities.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
Preo erational
Testin
Portions of the following tests
were witnessed
by the inspector:
17.3
Preoperational
Test of ASWS
Preoperational
Test of Traveling Screens
.
,
28. 6
21.4/A-3
8.3.3
Ener gizing 480 Volt Swi tchg ear
OG Emergency
Stop Button After Relocation
Boron Addition and Control
23. 3
21.3/A-3
26.3
Preoperational
Tests of Auxiliary and Fuel
Handling Buildings Ventilation
DG Air System
Preoperational
Test of Nitrogen Backup System
While witnessing the above testing (in some tests only parts of the
test were being performed or redone),
the in'spector 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.
10.
Exit Interview
The inspector
met with a senior licensee representative
on a weekly
basis
and with the representatives
(denoted in Paragraph
1) at the
conclusion of the inspection
on September
29, 1978.
The scope
and
findings of the inspection were summarized
by the inspector.
.
gP,A RE00
++*++
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMiVIISSION
REGION V
SUITE 202 ~ WALNUTCREEK PLA2A
1990 N. CALIFORNIA BOULEVARD
WALNUTCREEK, CALIFORNIA 94996
0'8
'I"./8
Docket
Ho. 50-275(78 P
Pacific Gas
and Electric Company
77 Beal e Str eet
San Francisco, California 94106
Attention:
Nr. Philip A. Crane, Jr.
Assistant
General
Counsel
Gentlemen:
Subject:
NRC Inspection of Diablo Canyon Unit
1
This refers to the inspection
conducted
by Messrs.
North and Baird
of this office on July 10-13 and 28,
1978 of activities authorized
by
NRC Construction
Permit
No. CPPR-39,
and to the discussion of
our findings held by Nr. North with t1r.
Ramsay
and other members of
your staff at the conclusion of'he inspection.
Areas
examined during this inspection are described
in the enclosed
inspection report.
tttithin these areas,
the inspection consisted of
selective examinations of procedures
and representative
records, in-
terviews with personnel,
and observations
by the inspectors.
No items of noncompliance with
NRC requirements
were identified within
the scope of this inspection.
In accordance
with Section 2.790 of the
NRC's "Rules of Practice, "
Part 2, Title 10,
Code of Federal
Regulations,
a copy of thi s letter
and the enclosed
inspection report will be placed in the
NRC's Public
Document
Room.
If this report contains'ny information that you believe
to be proprietary, it is necessary
that you submit
a written application
to this office, within 20 days of the date of this letter, requesting
that such information be withheld from public disclosure.
The applica-
tion must include
a full statement
of the reasons
why it is claimed that
the information is proprietary.
The application should
be prepared
so
Pacific Gas
and Electric Co.
g~!g g4 '678
that any proprietary information identified is contained
in an enclosure
to the application,
since the application without the enclosure will
also
be placed in the Public Document
Room. If we do not hear from you
in this regard within the specified period, the report will be placed in
the Public Document
Room.
Should you have any questions
concerning this inspection,
we will be
glad to discuss
them with you.
Sincerely,
Encl osur e:
IE Inspection
Report
No. 50-275/78-13
cc w/o encl:
R. P. Mischow,
PG8E
J.
D. Llorthington,
PGSE
H.
E. Book, Chief
Fuel Facility and Haterials
Safety Branch
0
Report No.
50-275/78-13
U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
Docket No.
50-275
License No.
CPPR-39
Safeguards
Group
Licensee;
Pacific Gas
and Electric Company
s
lp
77 Beale Street
San Francisco,
California 94106
Faci1ity Name:
Diablo Canyon Unit
1
Inspection at
San Luis Obi spo County
Inspection conducted
July 10-13 and 28,
1978
Inspectors:
H. S.
orth,
Radar tion Specialist
J.
B.
aird, Radiation Specialist
ate Signed
l(7
Date Signed
Approved By:
Summary:
H.
E.
Book, Chief, Fuel Facility and Haterials
Safety Branch
ate Signed
3'( /7E
Date Signed
Ins ection on Jul
10-13 and 28,
1978
Re ort No. 50-275/78-13
A~Id:
g
g
pg
dg
d
ddgd
gd
g ddg;
radiation protection staffing; radioactive waste,
procedures,
preoperational
testing,
measurement
Q.C., monitoring;
SNN license inspection;
IE Bulletin;
and tour of plant areas.
The inspection
involved 35 inspector
hours onsite
by two inspectors.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations
were identified.
RV Form 219 (2)
DETAILS .
Persons
Contacted
Princi al Licensee
Em lo ees
- R. Ramsay,
Plant Superintendent
- J. Shiffer, Power Plant Engineer
- J. Boots, Senior Chemical
Radiation Protection
Engineer
J.
Diamonon, g.C. Supervisor
M. Leppke, g.A. Supervisor
C. Schulze, Shift Foreman,
Training Coordinator
M. Norem, Resident Startup
Engineer,
G.
C.
W. Coley, Startup Engineer,
Unit 1,
G.
C.
D. Patty, Startup Engineer, Unit 2,
G. C.
J.
Sumner,
Startup Engineer,
Unit 1,
G.
C.
D. Rockwell, Resident Electrical
Engineer,
G.
C.
K. Rhodes,
Instrumentation
Engineer,
G.
C:
S. Skidmore,
Nuclear Engineer
Mestin house
J.
Knochel, Resident Electrical
Engineer
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
Trainin
- Emer enc
Plannin
- Radiation Protection
The status of training of onsite personnel
in the areas of Radiation
Protection
and
Emergency
Planning
was examined.
The plant staff con-
sists of'pproximately
140 individuals in all categories
excluding
security personnel.
A summary of training as of February
1978 noted
that 64Ã of the staf'f have received
Emergency
Plan training.
The
February
1978
summary
and training performed
between
February- and
the date of the inspection indicates that 878 of the plant have
been trained in Radiation Protection.
No items of noncompliance
or deviadions
were identified.
Radiation Protection - Staffin
Resignations
and transfers
in the Radiation
and Process
Monitor (RPM)
staff has significantly reduced
the level of training.
Six RPM's
are currently onsite.
Two of the six are relatively new and in the
early stages
of training.
Selection is in process for two additional
RPM's to raise
the staff to a total of eight.
The applicant reports
that the academic portion of the training for RPM's requires approxi-
mately two months.
The time required for practical training is vari-
able depending
on time available,
work assignments
and opportunities
for training at other facilities.
The applicant stated
that in the
event that additional trained
personnel
were required,
they could be
obtained
from other company facilities.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
Radioactive
Haste - Li uid - Monitorin
Inspection Report 50-275/77-18 reported that item
7 "Reciprocating
Charging
Pumps
Seal
Water Tank,"
FSAR Table 11.4-6,
had
been ex-
cluded from the applicant's
sampling
and analysis
procedures.
The
inspector verified that Chemical Analysis Procedure
A-1 has
been
revised to include this item.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
Radioactive
Waste - Gaseous
Initial Calibration of Flow Measurin
Devices
Inspection
Report 50-275/77-21
reported
the review of Pre0p Test
No. 24.2,
Prep erational
Test of the Gaseous
Radwaste
S stem,
and
the setting of the gas release
rate at
31
SCFM.
Discussions
with the
applicant established
that waste
gas releases will be calculated
on
the basis of initial and final pressures
and waste
gas
decay tank
volume.
The inspector verified that initial calibration of pressure
and flow instrumentation
had
been completed
as
Loop Tests24-11A,
24-llB and
24-11C
(waste
gas
decay tanks),
and 24-13 (waste
gas
by G.
C.
Instrumentation
and the test results
sent to the
plant operating staff.
No items of noncompliance or deviations
were identified.
Preo erational
Testin
Test data from completed
preoperational
tests
were examined to
assure
that the test results
were within the previously established
acceptance criteria and,
as applicable,
deviations
from acceptance
criteria were properly identified and disposed
in accordance
with
the applicant's
administrative
procedures.
Records for the follow-
ing completed tests
which had
been
approved
and accepted
by opera-
tions were examined.
4
Test No.
Test Descri tion
23.10,
Addendum
1
Preop Containment
Purge
System
24.1
Gaseous
Radwaste
Cleaning
Procedure
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
Radioactive
Waste - Measurement
.
C.
Inspection
Report 50-275/78-07
noted that the plant laboratory
had
been designated
as
a "Approved Laboratory"
by the State of California
in support of the analytical
requirements
of the
NPDES permit.
The
applicant submitted
a company wide analytical
measurement
g. A. pro-
gram to the State of California which addresses
personnel
qualifica-
tions, records
and record retention,
measurements
and analyses
(re-
stricted to
EPA approved tests
and methods)
and instrumentation
(type,
and
response
to off-normal operation
and maintenance).
The Sanita-
tion and Radiation Laboratory, California State
Department of Health,
has
approved
the plant laboratory for,all analyses
required
by the
NPDES permit with the exception of cyanide.
Process
and Effluent Monitorin
S stem
An acceptable
method of onsite calibration and/or verification of
vendors calibration of process
and effluent monitors
was identified
in IE Inspection
Report
No. 50-275/78-07.
During the inspection,
the onsite verification of the vendors calibration of these
systems
was discussed
with applicant
and vendor representatives.
The
FSAR,
Amendment 39, January
1976,
Page 11.4-24, states
with respect
to
calibration, "Calibration Procedure:
Primary calibration for area
and process
monitors is per
orme
on
a one-time basis, utilizing
typical isotopes of interest to determine
proper detector
response.
Further primary calibrations are
not. required since the geometry
cannot
be significantly altered within the sampler.
Calibration
of samplers is then performed
based
on a
known correlation
between
the detector
responses
and
a secondary
standard."
The applicant proposed
to perform single point-energy onsite verifi-
cation of the vendors original calibration using
a vendor supplied
and calibrated
"cap source"
which would assure
a reproducible
source-
detector
geometry.
Following discussions
with NRC Headquarters,
Mr. J. Shiffer, Power Plant Engineer,
was informed by telephone
on
July 28, 1978, that the proposed
use of a "cap source" onsite to
verify the vendor's calibration
was acceptable.
Mr. Shiffer was
also informed that this verification of calibration will probably
O.
not be ac'ceptable for subsequent
calibrations of'his equipment
when the plant becomes
operational.
It is expected that calibra-
tion requirements will be contained in the plant technical specifi-
cations.
No items of noncompliance or deviations
were identified.
Ins ection of SNM Licenses
Licenses
SNM-1503 and
SNM-1667, which authorize receipt
and storage
of fuel at Units
1
and 2, respectively,
were inspected.
No items of
noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
The results of the in-
spections
were documented
and reported to the licensee
separately.
With respect to license
SNM-1503; the applicant reported.
by telephone
on -June
15,
1978 that the borated water level in the spent fuel
pool
was inadvertently lowered
21 inches
below the required level.
The occurrence
was discussed
with the licensee.
The instrument
air header
was being prepared for repair of a leak.
Prior to
reducing the header
pressure,
plant drawings were examined to
identify the source of air for the inflatable seal
on the fuel
pool transfer 'canal
door.
Drawing 102025,
Rev.
5, indicated
that the seal
was inflated with service air.
The instrument
air header
was
removed from service.
Six minutes later the
Spent
Fuel
Pool lower level alarm sounded.
Removal of service
air permitted water to drain to the refueling canal.
The water
level fell from 138'.9" (6/13/78 last measurement)
to 135'0.5"
on 6/15/78.
On 6/16/78,
the water level
was at 138'.9" (license
limit 137'").
The borated water was returned
to the spent fuel
pool
by pumping after tests for chlorides
and fluorides were per-
formed.
Licensee corrective action included installation of a
stand
by gas supply system to assure
that the seal
remains inflated.
The Technical
Review Group recommended field verification of pip-
ing schematic
drawings against
the as-built plant.
The Technical
Review Group identified the occurrence
as nonconform-
ance
and
a Potentially Reportable
Item, which was documented
in
DC1780PN006.
Unit 2 fuel
possessed
and stored
under License
SNM-1667 is stored
dry.
An application to delete
the requirement for fuel storage
under borated water for License
SNM-1503 is currently pending.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
~
~
4
e
Action on
IE Bulletin 78-08 - Radiation Levels
From
S ent Fuel
Transfer
Tubes
The inspectors
discussed
the subject bulletin with applicant
representatives.
The applicant
was gathering
information in
preparation for response
to the bulletin at the time of the
inspection.
The inspectors
examined
the accessible
portions of
the fuel element transfer
Cube
(FETT) inside
and outside con-
tainment
on Units
1
and 2.
Inside containment,
the top and sides
of the
FETT are surrounded
by a steel
horseshoe
shaped
shield.
This. shield may
be raised for inspections
by means of a hydraulic
cylinder
and
pump.
The possibility of a catastropic failure of the
shield lifting mechanism
when the shield is in the raised position
with possible failure of the shield support structure
and sever-
ance of the
FETT, when flooded was discussed.
The applicant will
include this consideration
in the evaluation.
No items of noncompliance or deviations
were identified.
Facilit
Tour
The facility including the control
room, Unit
1
and
2 containments,
waste treatment
systems
and storage
areas,
laboratory, Unit
1
and
2
fuel handling buildings and turbine building were toured.
No items of noncompliance or deviations
were identified.
Exit Interview
The inspector
met with applicant representatives
(denoted
in
Paragraph
1) at the conclusion of the inspection
on July 13,
1978.
The applicant
was informed that
no items of noncompliance
or devia-
tions
had
been identified.
The inspector
summarized
the purpose
and scope of the inspection
and the findings.
With respect to
onsite calibration of process
and effluent monitors, the appli-
.cant was informed that calibration requirements
would be examined
after the inspection
and the
IE position communicated
to the
applicant at
a later time.
The IE position was communicated
to
the applicant
by telephone
on, July 28,
1978 (reference
Paragraph
8).'he
question
concerning
the possible failure of the fuel element
transfer tube shield was identified.
The applicant stated that the
possibility would be examined
(reference
Paragraph
10).