IR 05000528/1985036
| ML20155G740 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 04/22/1986 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20155G721 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-528-85-36, 50-529-85-38, 50-530-85-28, NUDOCS 8605070108 | |
| Download: ML20155G740 (3) | |
Text
r.,
,.'
.., -
'
,
,..
..
.
-
,
.
.
"
s.,.
,
..........._.
_
_
-.c
. '.
...
.
u.o Errata Sheet-
.
_.
SALP Board Report No. 50-528/85-36, 50-529/85-38 and 50-530/85-28 a
,-
.
'Sh
- e
d Part III.. SUMMARY.OF RESULTS Functional Area 18 Preoperational Testing Page 3
_ _.
-
..
,
Now Reads:
~
"
Last SALP This SALP Functional Areas Period Rating Period Rating Trend *
18.. Preoperational Testing
2 Not Apparent" Should Read:
,
"
' Functional Areas Period Rating Period Rating Trend 18. Preoperational Testing
1 Improved"
,
l
.
Basis:
This is an editorial error in the summary table. The evaluation detail in pages 27 and 28 show Category I rating and steadily improved performance
,
during the assessment period. Therefore, the summary table is revised to reflect the evaluation detail.
!
e l'
t I
r i
i DOCK O DR R
I G
!
.., a l
F
.
'
. ;~
<
,,
.,
,,
,
III. SLHMARY OF RESULTS
"'
'
Overall, the SALP Board found the licensee's perfomance to be accehtable
and directed toward safe facility operation. The Board identified
rength or improvements in the areas of operator's response to unusual nt conditions, fire protection systems, and preoperational testing.
p Howgver, performance should be improved in the areas of surveillance,
-.
emergency preparedness, security, and subcontractor quality assurance, due t observed weaknesses or a declining trend.
-
-
_
r_ _ _ _ _
Last SALP This SALP Functional eas Period Rating Period Rating Trend *
.~
1.
Plant Op~epations
2 Improved 2.
Radiologicf1 Controls
2 Not Apparent
"'
3.
Maintenance
2 Improved
-
4.
Surveillance None
-- 2 Not Apparent
,
x-5.
Fire Protectibn None
Not Apparent 6.
Emergency Prep ~ar g ess
2 Declined **
7.
Security
2
Improved 8.
Refueling None
None g
9.
Quality Program an h None 2***
Not Apparent Administration Congols 10. Licensing Activities *
2 Not Apparent 11. Training None
Not Apparent
-.
.-_.12.
Containment Safety-y2
Not Apparent Related Structures, W
and Major Steel Supports
.
13.
Piping Systems
.
s and Supports
2
,
14.
Safety-Related M
Not Apparent
'
t I
Components
2 Not Apparent 15. Auxiliary Systems 2 %
Not Apparent 16. Electrical Equipment W
and Cables
2 Not Apparent
,
.,
17.
Instrumentation I
i Not Apparent g
18. Preoperational Testing
',
Not Apparent 19.
Startup Testing
2 Not Apparent i
The trend indicates the SALP Board's perception of the trend of the licensee's performance during the current assessment period.
It is not necessarily a comparison of performance during the current period with the previous period. For example, performance in the fire protection area was considered to be improving, even though performance in this functional area was not assessed during the previous SALP period.
While an overall decline between rating periods was observed, an improvement in performance was noted toward the end of this appraisal period.
-
- This area was considered by the Board to be a marginal Category 2 rating, with significant deficiencies.
i ORIGINAL PAGE
,
I
.
M
, _ _.. _,,,._
, _ _. _,,.
-,
_
_
.
-
_,
F
- 2
..
. -' 4.;
.,
.,
III, SUMMARY OF RESULTS Overall, the SALP Board found the licensee's performance to be acceptable
and directed toward safe facility operation. The Board identified strength or improvements in the areas of operator's response to unusual a
plant conditions, fire protection systems, and preoperational testing.
E0"*V8r., performance,should be_ improved in,.the, areas,of. surveillance,-
...
,
emergency preparedness, security, and subcontractor quality assurance, due to observed weaknesses or a declining trend.
~
~
Last SALP This SALP Functional Areas Period Rating Period Rating Trend *
_ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _
_
.
1.
Plant Operations
2 Improved 2.
Radiological Controls
2 Not Apparent
..
3.
Maintenance
2 Improved 4.
Surveillance None
.5.
Fire Protection None
'.,_ 2 Not Apparent
Not Apparent
'6.
2 Declined **
7.
Security
2 Improved 8.
Refueling None
None 9.
Quality Program and None 2***
Not Apparent Administration Controls 10.
Licensing Activities
2 Not Apparent 11.
Training None
Not Apparent
.
12.
Containment Safety-
2 Not Apparent Related Structures, and Major Steel Supports 13.
Piping Systems
.
and Supports
2 Not Apparent 14.
Safety-Related
,
'
Components
2 Not Apparent l
15.
Auxiliary Systems
2 Not Apparent 16.
Electrical Equipment and Cables
2 Not Apparent 17.
Instrumentation
1 Not Apparent 18.
Preoperational Testing
1 Improved
.
19.
Startup Testing
2 Not Apparent
The trend indicates the SALP Board's perception of the trend of the licensee's performance during the current assessment period.
It is not necessarily a comparison of performance during the current period with the previous period.
For example, performance in the fire protection area was considered to be improving, even though performance in this functional area was not assessed during the previous SALP period.
While an overall decline between rating periods was observed, an improvement in performance was noted toward the end of this appraisal period.
This area was considered by the Board to be a marginal Category 2 rating, with significant deficiencies.
CORRECTED PAGE Ja 1