IR 05000528/1989002
| ML17305B460 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 04/09/1991 |
| From: | Zimmerman R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | Conway W ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE CO. (FORMERLY ARIZONA NUCLEAR |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9104160188 | |
| Download: ML17305B460 (8) | |
Text
<gI: RECg G
Cj I
'
+>>*l~
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
1450 MARIALANE,SUITE 210 WALNUTCREEK, CALIFORNIA64596 April 9, 1991 Arizona Public Service Company P. 0.
Box 53999, Station 9012 Phoenix, Arizona 85072-3999 Attention:
Mr. M. F.
Conway Executive Vice President, Nuclear Gentlemen:
Subject:
NRC Inspection of Palo Verde Units 1, 2 and 3, Report No. 89-02 and NRC Investigation Case No. 5-89-002 This refers to the inspection conducted by Mess'rs.
A. Johnson and C.
Ramsey of this office during the period January 9-13, 1989, of activities authorized by NRC License Nos.
NPF-41, NPF-51, and NPF-74, and to the discussion of our findings held by the inspectors with members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
Subsequently, the NRC Office of Investigations conducted an investigation to determine whether the violation described in Report No.
89-02 was willful.
The synopsis of their investigation is enclosed..
Based on the results of the inspection, it appears that one of your activities was not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements.
Specifically, you had not conducted annual fire drills during 1987 and 1988 with the Phoenix Fire Department, the local offsite fire department, nor had you provided coordinated radiological training to the appropriate personnel of the Phoenix Fire Department.
This is considered to be a Severity Level IV Violation (Supplement I).
however, due to the age of the violation, our verification of your actions taken to correct these deficiencies, and the low safety significance of the violation, we are not issuing a Notice of Violation.
Therefore, no response with respect to this matter is required.
In accordance with 10 CFR Part 1.790(a),
a copy of this letter and the enclosure will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
Sincerely, R'P R.
.
immerman, Director Division of Reactor Safety and Projects cy104>+Pi88 9 PDR ADOCK 050 G
'80 f
Enclosure:
~
~
~
~
~
Office of Investigation Case No. 5-89-002 Synopsis
REGION V==
WWagner/jg
+ gCl91 HWong P/ $ 91 FR uey
~/~-/91 J. Dyer, NRR C. Trammell, NRR J. Lieberman, OE J. Caldwell, OEDO DFKirs h y / g/91
/
NO YES /
R~+
KPerki s
RZimmerman
/
.
4//9 /91
/
NO S
E
/
NO
] YES /
NO
]
YES /
NO
] YES /
N j
R ES /
NO
]
e OFFICE OF INVESTIGATION CASE NO. 5-89-002 SYNOPSIS On February 15, 1989, the Regional Administrator, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory, Commission,'egion V, requested that an investigation be initiated to determine if management of the'rizona Nuclear Power Project- (ANPP) willfully or with careless disregard failed to implement certain NRC License Conditions contained in the Operating License for the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS), Unit 1.
The License Conditions in question required ANPP to provide radiological training for the Phoenix Fire Department (PFD), the offsite backup Fire Department to the PVNGS Fire Department during a major fire, and to include the PFD in at least one fire drill per year.
The OI investigation determined that some training, on at least two occasions between 1984 and 1989, was provided by PVNGS to PFD and that PFD hazardous materials teams further received PVNGS site orientation visits during 1984 or 1985.
The. investigation also determined that during the 1983 to 1987 timeframe, the Bechtel Power Corporation (BPC) Fire Brigade trained with the PVNGS Fire Brigade and the two entities held quarterly fire drills together.
The investigation concluded that the.ANPP individual responsible for implementation of the NRC license requirements between 1984 and 1987 had training provided by PVNGS employees to PFD personnel and included a
simulated PFD response to ANPP during each annual ANPP emergency planning drill.
This individual testified that he felt that ANPP was in compliance with NRC License Conditions in the area of PFD training and annual fire drill participation.
The ANPP individual responsible for implementation of the NRC License Requirements between 1987 and 1989 testified that he attempted to hold an actual fire drill in December 1987 with PFD that was postponed due to poor weather conditions and, due to his own oversight, was never rescheduled.
-There was not sufficient evidence developed to substantiate the allegation that ANPP management or ANPP employees willfullyor deliberately failed to implement the required NRC License Conditions;