ML17300A429

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Insp Repts 50-528/86-24,50-529/86-24 & 50-530/86-18 on 860701-0803 & Notice of Violation.Strong Commitment on Part of Util & Plant Mgt Necessary to Achieve post-trip Review Evaluations of Consistently High Quality
ML17300A429
Person / Time
Site: Palo Verde  
Issue date: 08/21/1986
From: Kirsch D
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To: Van Brunt E
ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE CO. (FORMERLY ARIZONA NUCLEAR
Shared Package
ML17300A430 List:
References
NUDOCS 8609080323
Download: ML17300A429 (4)


See also: IR 05000528/1986024

Text

P

~

A

T

0

l

I

I

8609080323

860821

6PDR/

ADOCg pgpp0528

AUG 2i

>os'ocket

Nos. 50-528,

50-529,

and 50-530

Attention:

Arizona Nuclear Power Project

P.

O.

Box 52034

Phoenix,

Arizona

85072-2034

1

Mr. E. E.

Van Brunt Jr.

Executive Vice President

k

C

Gentlemen:

/

Subject:

NRC Inspection of Palo Verde Units 1,

2 and 3.

This refers to the inspection

conducted

by Messrs.

R. Zimmerman,

C. Bosted,

G. Fiorelli, J. Ball and K. Ivey of this office on July

1 August 3,

1986 of

activities authorized

by NRC License Nos.

NPF-41,

NPF-51 and Construction

Permit Number CPPR-143,

and to the discussion of our findings held with

yourself and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.

Areas

examined during this inspection are described in the enclosed

inspection

report.

Within these

areas,

the inspection consisted

of selective

examinations

of procedures

and representative

records,

interviews with

personnel,

and observations

by the inspectors.

Based

on the results of this inspection, it appears

that one of your

activities was 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 of 10 CFR 2.201

as stated in Appendix A, Notice of Violation.

In addition to, the above violation, we continue to have

some concern with the

level of quality exhibited by your post trip review process.

Our letter to

you dated January

30,

1986, which transmitted Inspection Report 50-528/85-43,

provided an assessment

of your post trip evaluations;

identifying areas

which

we believed required

improvement.

Our recent review of your post trip efforts

regarding

a reactor trip at Unit

1 on July 12,

1986, indicated that although

improvements

have been

made, further enhancement

to the process is warranted.

Particular 'emphasis

should be focused

on data gathering

and evaluation,

the

development of a systematic

approach

toward planning

and troubleshooting of

equipment malfunctions

and the development of specific plant restart criteria.

Our inspectors

noted that considerable

revamping of your post trip review

methodology took place following our comments during the July

12 post trip

review process.

Although those

changes

appear

to have been effective in

improving the thoroughness

and approach

toward evaluation, of a subsequent

reactor trip, we believe that

a continuing strong

commitment

on the part of

corporate

and plant management is necessary

to achieve post trip review

evaluations

of consistently high quality.

Pr ll

k'

'F(l)'.;

, h'4,

I

44')"

f

4

I

~ r

a

Fdp,, f

I'

)a

a

It

,.)WIW"

f

4 ap

v

(f ')F

I

~

tlf")

lj

Wilp.ate)

.fd"p

~ .F

4 Wi'PE Wf

CP

wf

(7

(la

It p,t

II

F

I

jp'

4 '

ff). d'

d

p

itl'

dr,

~

)pt

(p

It

M

~

Jpwdtt)

f

~

gd 4)

t

I

tl

4

((f

e ~

. f) .

7

4

It

I

4

"

J

"f)

I 4

d(A f" I'

f

'u

~

f 'f

p

(7)

'4(, lid(

V

ddt

I

gd

,t, (,7,

4 ftff

,'f

WC<

,

f

d

'dl

'f '. I I) p

aea f

e

'7 'l

. *)r ~

4,

'1 f

p

7

f4pI]=,'ll

r

7"f

'I'

f)r ,4

fw

w,,()7p

d

fd

lt'

I

ppfg

f f

w

()

I'f

~

',

4 rd f

II

WP

I

f)f(if jj

W <<a

ff

p

f

>>

I

P

'

I

(

4

)

J

II

7

)

'7

') 'I

7 )

t..) I

dl'4 l

w 'fIi)

tlat

f I,,

)4'f

'I)

7

", 4

)WW )

~

~

7)I

I

>> fl

~08 2i )986

In accordance

with 10 CFR 2.790(a),

a copy of. this letter and the enclosure

will be placed in the

NRC Public Document Room.

The response

directed by this letter and the accompanying Notice are not

subject to the clearance

procedure of the Office of Management

and Budget as

required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,

PL 96-511.

t

Should you have any questions

concerning this inspection,

we will be pleased

to discuss

them with you.

Sincerely,

D. F. Ki

ch,, Director

Division of Reactor Safety'nd Projects

Enclosures:

A. Appendix A - Notice of Violation

B. Inspection Report Nos. 50-528/86-24,

50-529/86-24,

and 50-530/86-18

cc w/enclosures:

J.

G. Haynes,

Vice President,

Nuclear Production

J.

R.

Bynum,

PVNGS Plant Manager

W.

F. Quinn, Manager,

Nuclear Operations Licensing

T ~

D. Shriver,

Manager,

Compliance

W.

E. Ide, Manager,

Corporate

QA/QC

C.

N. Russo,

Manager,

QA Audits/Monitoring

Arthur C. Gehr, Esq.

Ms. J. Morrison

Ms. L. Bernabei,

GAP

D. Railsback,

Arizona Corporation

Commission

bcc w/enclosures:

RSB/Document Control Desk (RIBS)

Project Inspector

Resident Inspector

G.

Cook

B. Faulkenberry

J. Martin

bcc w/o enclosure

B:

LFMB

Region

V

RZi4merman/norma

AFifrelii

8/() /86

8//I /86

CP-

AEChaffee

DFKirsch

8/ck>/86

8/

/86

A'

CB'osted

JBall

'RIvey

LMiller

8/

6

8//</86

8/g-/86

8/ A+86

JMa

n

6

AJo @son

8/(g/86

WF I

M

W

4

h

ll

I

FFM

14

(

I

W

I

I

F

fl

I MM

I'

F

Fi

4

IF

4

4

M