ML17304B155
| ML17304B155 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 04/28/1989 |
| From: | Zimmerman R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | Karner D ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE CO. (FORMERLY ARIZONA NUCLEAR |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17304B156 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8905150351 | |
| Download: ML17304B155 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000528/1989008
Text
AC CELE P>TED
I'lFTKBt'7l ON
'EMONiTRk'ROY
SYSTEM
REGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (RIDS)
ESSION NBR:8905150351
DOC.DATE: 89/04/28
NOTARIZED: NO
DOCKET
CIL:STN-50-528 Palo Verde Nuclear Station,
Unit, 1, Arizona Publi
05000528
STN-50-529 Palo Verde Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Arizona Publi
05000529
STN-50-530 Palo Verde Nuclear Station, Unit 3, Arizona Publi
05000530
AUTH.NAME
AUTHOR AFFILIATION
ZIMMERMAN,R.P.
Region 5, Ofc of the Director
RECIP.NAME
.
RECIPIENT AFFILIATION
R
KARNER,D.
Arizona Nuclear Power Project (formerly Arizona.,Public Serv
1
SUBJECT:
Forwards Special Insp Repts 50-528/89-08,50-529/89-08
&
50-530/89-08
on 890313-17.Violations
noted.
D
DISTRIBUTION CODE:
IE35D
COPIES
RECEIVED:LTR
ENCL
SIZE:
63
TITLE: Emergency Preparedness-Appraisal/Confirm
tory Ac ion Ltr/Exercise
ep ~
NOTES:Standardized
plant.
05000528 /
Standardized
plant.
05000529
Standardized
plant.
05000530
A.
RECIPIENT
ID CODE/NAME
PD5
DAVIS,M
INTERNAL: NRR/DREP/EPB
10
NUDgCS-ABSTRACT
E~"Z~L
02
GN2/DRSS/EPRPB
E
ERNAL: LPDR
NOTES'OPIES
LTTR ENCL
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
RECIPIENT
ID CODE/NAME
CHAN,T
DAVIS,M.J.
NRR/PMAS/ILRB12
OC/LFMB
RGN5 'ILE
01
I
NRC PDR
A
COPIES
LTTR ENCL
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
D
S
NCtXE K) ALL "RIDS" RECIPIENIS:
D
D
PIZAS
HELP US 'IO REDUCE WASTE!
CONI'ACT 'IHE DOCUMENT CDh'IDOL DESK,
ROOM Pl-37
(EXT. 20079)
TO ELDGNATE KXR NAME FBCH DISTRIKTZIGN
LISTS R)R DOCUMENIS YOU MH'T NEZDt
TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES
REQUIRED:
LTTR
15
ENCL
14
V
Arizona Nuclear
Power Project
Post Office Box 52034
Phoenix,. Arizona
85072-2304
Attn:
Mr.
D. Karner
Executive Vice President
Dear Mr. Karner:
SUBJECT:
EMERGENCY OPERATING
PROCEDURES
INSPECTION AT PALO VERDE
This letter forwards the results
and conclusions
of a special
team inspection
conducted
by
NRC Region
V and the Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation of
activities authorized
by
NRC Operating
License
Nos.
and
NPF-74 for Palo Verde Units 1, 2,
and
3.
The inspection
was conducted
on
March 13,
1989 through. March 17,
1989.
At the conclusion of the inspection,
the findings were discussed
with Mr. Haynes
and other
members of your staff
identified in the enclosed
inspection report.
The purpose of this inspection
was to verify that your Emergency Operating
Procedures
(EOPs)
are technically correct; that their specified actions
can
be
meaningfully accomplished
using existing equipment,
controls,
and
instrumentation;
and that the available
procedures
have the useability
necessary
to provide the operator with an effective tool to manage
and
mitigate potential
accidents.
The areas
examined during the inspection
are
identified in the attached
inspection report.
The inspection consisted
of a
selective
examination of procedures,
simulated
emergencies
exercised
on your
plant specific simulator, procedure
walkthroughs in the plant with operations
personnel,
and interviews with a broad selection of your operations,
procedure
writing, and training staffs.
Through direct observation of the performance
of selected
procedures
during
the simulator, exercises,
and through plant walkthroughs of selected
procedures,
we have concluded that your operating staff can utilize the
to manage
and mitigate serious
operational
events.
However, the
procedures
have significant useability concerns.
Chiefly, the
as they
are
now constituted
are overly complex and
have
numerous
inconsistencies.
These
problems
are of a
human factors nature
and are detailed in the report.
This inspection
was the third time your
EOPs were inspected.
The findings of
this inspection
are similar to the findings of past inspections,
indicating
that the fundamental
problems affecting quality and useability of your
procedures
have not been corrected.
The concerns
regarding the quality and
useability of your
EOPs appear equally applicable to your Abnormal
and
Normal Operating
Procedures.
Further,
the
team found additional
evidence
that the simulator does
not adequately
replicate certain plant conditions,
creating the potential for negative operator training.
In addition, the
team found evidence of a poor professional
relationship
between
the
raining and operations
organizations.
Compounding these
concerns,
the
85'051
0=-:
1
Sg(>42::-:
PDl~
ADCiCK 0,:000.~28
9
-
Pbc
APR 2."
<gpss
team found that the operators
recognized
the procedure
problems
and were not
satisfied with the quality and useability of procedures
used during simulator
scenarios.
The above concerns
provide further evidence that the management
of
activities at your facility needs significant improvement.
During the course of the inspection your staff outlined the program that was
in place to completely revise the
EOPs.
The inspection
team expressed
a
concern that the resources
being utilized to produce the
EOP procedure
revision within the time frame of implementation
by July of 1990
may not be
adequate.
The concern centers
on assuring that the
EOP procedure
revision
does
not repeat
the concerns
associated
with the current
EOPs.
To this end
the inspection
team
recommended
that the revision effort include
a
multi-disciplinary approach
emphasizi ng human factors,
a well defined
verifi,cation and validation program,
and adherence
to a full scope writers
guide.
We request that you formally transmit to the
NRC your plans for corrective
actions related to the findings in the enclosed
inspection report within 30
days of receipt of this letter.
Your response
should address
specifically
.what corrective actions
you plan on taking concerning the current
EOPs,
and
how those corrective actions
wi 11
be addressed
in the future revision of the
EOPs.
In accordance
with 10 CFR 2.790(a),
a copy of this letter
and the enclosures
will be placed in the
NRC Public Document
Room.
The response
requested
by this letter and its enclosures
are not subject to
the clearance
procedures
of the Office of Management
and Budget
as required
by
the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980,
Pub.
L.
No.96-511.
Should you have
any questions
concerning this inspection,
we will be pleased
to discuss
them with you.
Sincerely,
/. ~/lj'?u~~'h<C'>]
Roy P.
Zimmerman, Director
Division of Reactor Safety
and Projects
Enclosures:
.
l.
Inspection
Report 50-528/89-08,
50-529/89-08,
50-530/89-08
2.
Appendix
A to Report 50-528/89-08,
50-529/89-08,
50-530/89-08
f-:PR 2 8
1989
-3"
cc w/enclosures
J.
G.
Haynes,
W.'. quinn,
L. Souza,
T.
D. Shriver,
C.
N.
Russo,
D.
Canady,
L. Bernabei,
GAP
T.
Hogan,
ACC
A.
C.
Gehr,
Esq.,
Snell
and
bcc w/enclosures:
G. Lapinsky,
Docket File
Project Inspector
Resident
Inspector
G.
Cook
B. Faulkenber ry
J. Martin
R.
Nease,
State of Arizona
bcc w/o enclosures:
M. Smith
J. Zollicoffer
REGION V/jg.,
GJohnston
~p
TMeadows/
't /8 /89
- ~
~i /("> /89
Wi lmer
SRichards
-t /~:I/89
j
DKirsch
9 b'i/89
.A~
RZimmerman
/ /aP'89
UEST
COPY ] gEgUEST
COPY ] REQUEST
COPY ] gEgUEST
COPY ] REQUEST
PY ]
YES /
NO
HAYES /
NO
YES
. /
NO
fVES /
NO
YES /
END TO
]
YES /
NO