ML17083B502
| ML17083B502 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 01/15/1985 |
| From: | Andrea Johnson, Kirsch D, Shackleton O NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8502150510 | |
| Download: ML17083B502 (8) | |
Text
r
<c tp
~ ~
MEMORANDUM TO: File I It 'I ii ', >!.I.
YlJCLI-'/(i0 Pf;'iJl is'i (;iiT'.'(Il/<<,'.',
.l(ri'v'I.I310li V
14SO MAIIIALAW[',fetl> I I /10 1VALNUTCIILI'.K,CALIIOIII'I> 94'!>I~
JAN 1 S tg85 ENCLOSURE 1
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Allegation Review Board Diablo Canyon Allegation Review
/
On Thursday, December 20,
- 1984, an allegation review board comprised of Messrs.
Kirsch, A. Johnson, Shackleton, and Crowley met to review the following documents.
Mr. Chaffee was also in attendance as an observer to the proceedings:
Amendment to July 31, '1984 10 CFR 2 '06 GAP Petition received November 15, 1984, includes eighteen exhibits'RV84A115)
GAP Letter to Commission dated November 1, 1984, includes four attachments.
(RV84A114)
Eighteen Diablo Canyon interview transcripts supplied by OI, reference memo from Ron Meeks'dated November 19, 1984 'RV84A115)
Four Diablo Canyon interview transcripts supplied by OI, reference memo from Ron Meeks dated November 20, 1984 (RV84A115).
1.
The 10 CFR 2.206 petition amendment received November 15, 1984, contained fifty-two allegations which will be entered into the Diablo Canyon Allegation File '(DCAF) system under the DCAF numbers 1545 through 1596.
The board also. reviewed the. eighteen exhibits to the petition and determined that the information contained in the exhibits offers no new significant facj;s that would warrant reinspection of areas and/or programs previously inspected by the staff.
Five allegations concerning intimidation and/or wrongdoing were gleaned from the exhibits and will be transferred to OI for investigation.
The five allegations will be assigned DCAF numbers 1597 through 1601
'esolution responsibility is as follows:
- 1545, 1547,
- 1546, 1556,
- 1597, 1598,
- 1551, 1552,
- 1565, 1566,
- 1575, 1576,
- 1593, 1594)
- 1548, 1578,
- 1599, 1553,
- 1567, 1577, 1595
- 1549, 1550
- 1579, 1580,
- 1581, 1583)
- 1588, 16003 1601 1554~
1555~
1559~
1561) 1562~
1568~ 1569'570~
1571) 1572~
1582~
15847 1585~
1586~
1587 1596
- 1589, 1590,
- 1563, 1564, 15731
- 1574, 1591,
- 1592, To PGSZ for response (RV P) 1557'558'560
L
2.
The twenty-two Diablo Canyon Interview transcripts supplied by OI were reviewed by the board.
The board determined that the information contained in the transcripts was either duplicative of previously addressed allegations or did not present sufficient information to warrant a staff investigation.
Forty allegations of wrongdoing and/or intimidation were gleaned from the transcripts and will be transferred to OI for investigation.
The forty allegations will be ass'igned DCAF numbers 1602 through 1641.
3.
The GAP Letter to the Commission dated November 1,
1984 was reviewed by the board and was found to contain fifty-three allegations that will be entered into the DCAF system under allegation number 1492 through 1544.
Resolution responsibility is as follows:
NRR 1513) 1514) 1515) 1516) 1517) 1518) 1523) 1524 OI
- 1497, 1500,
- 1529, 1539, 1543 RV
- 1493, 1495,
- 1496, 1498,
- 1499, 1505)
- 1506, 1507,
- 1526, 1535,
- 1536, 1537,
- 1538, 1540 To PG&E for response (RV-P)
- 1492, 1494,
- 1501, 1502,
- 1503, 1504,
- 1508, 1509, 1510)
- 1511, 1512,
- 1519,
'520,
- 1521, 1522,
- 1525, 1527,
- 1528, 1530,
- 1531, 1532,
- 1533, 1534,
- 1541, 1542, 1544 4.
5..
Based on the licensee's response contained in DCL-84-328, the boar3 has determined that allegation 0317 requires no further action.
Based
.on the.licensee's response contained in DCL-84-343, the board has determined that allegation 1275 requires no further action.
D. F. Ki ch.
Date 0.
ack n
D e
. Joh o
Date Date A. Chaffee Date
PAGE NO.
1 01/15/85 ALLEGE
RESPONSE
LTR 4 0317 DCL-84-328 1275 DCL-84-343 CLOSING REF ABM 12/20/84 ABM 12/20/84 DIABLO CANYON ALLEGATIONS UNIT2 CHARACTERIZATION MANAGEMENT DID NOT HAVE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FROM VENDORS TO GUIDE CALCULATIONS REQUIRED OF VENDOR PURCHASES FOR STRUCTURAL STEEL SUPPORTS BOTH THE NRC STAFF AND PG&E'S THEORIES MAY BE INACCURATE ABOUT HOV P&ID'S AND OVID'S ARE USED. UNIT 2 HYDROSTATIC TEST PACKAGES HAVE BEEN ISSUED ARITH OVID'S INSTEAD OF P&ID'S AND THEY MERE INACCURATE
~
I
II
~
ENCLOSURE 2
DIABLO CANYON OPERATOR QUALIFICATIONS AND STAFFING Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 share a
common control room.
For such a
configuration, 10 CFR 50.54(m)(2) requires a shift complement consisting of at least two senior operators and three operators.
PG&E plans to have operators at Diablo Canyon dually-licensed on both units.
The operators for Unit 2 thus will be the same operators who have previously been evaluated for and experienced in Unit 1 operation.
The Diablo Canyon operating staff includes 55 operators, of which 30 have passed the required Unit 2 difference examinations and are experienced in Unit 1 operations above 20K power.
The dual licenses for the other 25 are pending.
All of'he operators observed operations and startup tests above 20% power on Unit I.
We believe that the size and experience of the operating staff is adequate to support both Unit I and Unit 2 operations.
Diablo Canyon uses advisors on the operating shifts to assure that an individual is available who has had substantial previous operating experience on a similar plant, in accordance with Gener ic Letter 84-16.
The advisors that will serve for Unit 2 would be the same advisors who previously were evaluated and found acceptable to monitor Unit 1; on this basis, we would find them qualified to serve for Unit 2.
PG&E is currently performing the Unit 1 power ascension test program.
PG&E has recognized that simultaneous startup of two units could be an excessive strain on the operating staff and intends to limit Unit I maneuvers during Unit 2 startup operations, if Unit 2 is licensed before the Unit 1 power ascension program is complete.
PG&E currently estimates that Unit 2 will be ready to load fuel by March 31, 1985; the Unit 1 startup program should be completed by then if there are no major delays.
We will present the operator qualifications and the eventual staffing plans for Unit 2 (depending on whether the Unit 1 startup program is completed) in the SER supplement for Unit 2.
~
~
~,