ML17305A500
| ML17305A500 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 01/30/1990 |
| From: | Martin J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | Conway W ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE CO. (FORMERLY ARIZONA NUCLEAR |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9002080318 | |
| Download: ML17305A500 (10) | |
See also: IR 05000528/1989048
Text
Arizona Nuclear
Power Project
Post Office Box 52034
Phoenix,
85072-2034
Attn:
Mr.
W.
F.
Conway
Executive Vice President,
Nuclear'entlemen:
This refers to the NRC's Systematic
Assessment
of Licensee
Performance
(SALP)
Board Report 50-528,
50-529,
50-530/89-48,
dated
November 22,
1989, for your
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station
and to the written comments
provided in
your December
29,
1989 letter in response
to the
SALP Board's report.
We have reviewed your December
29,
1989 response
and have concluded that your
response
was appropr'iate.
Your December
29,
1989 response
identified a
discrepancy
in Tables
1 and
2 of the Initial SALP Report for the functional
areas
of Radiological Controls
and
Emergency
Preparedness.
We have corrected
Tables
1 and 2.
However, the discrepancy
did not affect the
SALP Board
conclusions for those functional areas.
Related
NRC conclusions
are presented
in Appendix I to this letter.
As discussed
during our December
1,
1989
management
meeting, further improvements
in performance at Palo Verde appear
achievable if the various initiatives and corrective actions that have
been
formulated are fully implemented
and then maintained.
In particular, the
areas
of engineering,
maintenance,
and quality verification warrant special
attention.
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.
Should you have
any questions
concerning this letter, Appendix I hereto,
or
the
SALP Board's report,
we will be pleased
to discuss
them with you.
Sincerely,
Encl osur es:
J.
B. Martin
Regional Administrator
l.
Appendix I,
NRC Conclusions
2.
SALP Meeting Report
No. 50-528,
50-529,
50-530/89-55
3.
Licensee
Response
to Initial SALP Report,
dated
December
29,
1989
4.
Final
SALP Report
'002030-.<3
W00>30
PDR '.ADOCK 0 000523
hl
cc w/enclosures:
J.
MD Levine, Vice President,
Nuclear Production
M. F. Quinn, Director, Nuclear Safety
5 Licensing
B., E. Ballard, Sr., Director, Quality Assurance
T. Bradish, Acting Manager,
Compliance
" R. Fullmer, Manager,
QA Audits/Monitoring
D. Canady,
J.
N. Bailey, Vice President,
Nuclear Safety
and Licensing
A. C. Rogers,
Manager,
Licensing
Lynne Bernabei,
Government Accountability Project
(GAP)
James
R.
Brown, Utilities Division, Arizona Corp.
Comm.
A. C. G'ehr, Esq.,
Snell
5 Milmer
J.
R.
Newman,
Newman, S Holtzinger
bcc w/encl osures:
Docket File
Resident
Inspector
'roject
In'spector
. G.
Cook
B. Faulkenberry
J. Martin
R.
Nease,
. T. Murley,
NRC Commissioners
N; Western
bcc w/o enclosures
M. Smith
J. Zol.licofi'er
REGION ~
+~)
Ang/jg> ~r
HWong
( /zcj/90
'
/g.g/90
,
< /P/90
'/~//90
g
p8'Zimmerman
j /S~/90
ES')
NO
]
S /
NO
]
E
/
NO
] YES /
NO
YES /
NO
JBM rtin
Qrl/90
YES /
NO
]
ES /
NO
]
Q.b
r
I
APPENDIX I
NRC
CONCLUSIONS
A.*
Comments
Received
From Licensee
Arizona Public Service's
(APS) December 29,,1989
response
to the Palo
Verde
SALP Report presented
no significant objections to the content of
the report.
The
APS response
identified the miscategorization
of the
functional area for a Unit 2 and
a Unit 3 violation, identified in
Inspection
Reports 88-30,
and 88-38 respectively,
as
a radiological
control violation in lieu of an emergency
preparedness
violation.
The
error was corrected in Tables
1 and
2 of the attached
SALP Report.
The
'error did not affect the conclusions
or ratings for the associated
functional areas.
B.
NRC Conclusions
Re ardin
Acce tabilit
of Licensee's
Planned
orrec
sve
c lons
Me concluded that your proposed actions to address
areas
needing
improvement were responsive.
Me will review your progress
as part of oui
future inspection program,
as appropriate.
F
C.
Re ional Administrator's Conclusions
Based
on Consideration of
licensee
s
es
onse
I have concluded that the overall ratings in the affected areas
have not
changed.
pA'
fi
ij
BOARD REPORT
REVISION SHEET
PAGE
Table
1
Page
2
Table
1
Page
2
Table
1
Page
3
Table
1
Page
3
Table
2
Page
2
Table
2
Page
3
LINE
B-Category
IV Enforcement
Items
D-Category
IV Enforcement
Items
B-Category
IV Enforcement
Items
D-Category
IV Enforcement
Items
88-39
Functional.
Area
88-38
Functional
Area
NOW READS
2
Blank
SHOULD READ
0
B
Basis:
Violations 529/88-39
and 530/88-38 were miscategorized
as emergency
~
~
~
~
reparedness
violations rather than radiological control violations.
he error did not affect the conclusions
or ratings for either
functional area.
C
l