ML19340B176
| ML19340B176 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 09/05/1980 |
| From: | Madsen G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Cavanaugh W ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19340B177 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8010210600 | |
| Download: ML19340B176 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000313/1980014
Text
"
-
-
. ..
__.
..
_ , _
8
_.
M arcoi
,
,
.
UNITED STATES
/
..
/
h
. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
8 V [' I
'S
611 RY AN PLAZ A oRIVf., SWTE 1000
REGloN IV
i'l
e
-
/ ,f ..
ARLINGTON TE."*
76012
'%'s
2
/
%
/ /,
September 5, 1980
.....
In Reply. Refer To:
Dockat Nos.' -50-313/80-14
>
,
50-368/80-14'
Arkansas Power and Light Company
' ATTN: Mr. William Cavanaugh III
Vice President of Generation
and Construction
P. O. Box 551
.
Little Rock, Arkansas
72203
Gentlemen:
This refers to the management meeting held at your corporate offices on
August 20,.1980. The purpose of this. meeting was to discuss the Region's
first annual evaluation of AP&L activities relative to the ANO site. This
evalaation was made in accordance with the requirements of Task I.B.2 of the
"NRC Action Plan Developed as a Result of the TMI-2 Accident" (NUREG 0660)
and the NBC program entitled-Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance
,
!
(SALP).
t
(
The functional areas in which your performance was evaluated and the results
of the evaluation.are documented in Enclosure 1 to this letter. Details of-
the meeting are discussed in Enclosure 2.
No new items'of~ noncompliance were identified during the evaluation.
Based on
the results of.this evaluation Region IV will increase the frequency and/or
scope of' inspection and review activities in four areas. 'The four areas involved
and a summary of the Region's plans for increasing inspection efforts in those.
areas'are discussed in Enclosure 2.
No written reply is required in response
to this' letter.
In accordance with:Section 2.790 of-the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2,
. Title 10, Code of Federal' Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosures
will-be.placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.' If this material contains
i
any.information that you or;your-contractors believe to be proprietary,
it is
!
_necessary that'you make'a written application within twenty'(20) days to this
i
.' office to withhold such information :from public disclosure. .. Any such applica-
tion must include a-full: statement of the reasons on the basis of which 'it is .
Lelaimed that the'information is proprietary, and should be' prepared so that
~
l proprietary information identified in the application is contained in a separate
P
part of ti e document.1. If we do not- hear from -you in this regard within the
specified period, the. letter and: enclosures will be.placed in the Public Docu-
ment Room.-
4
8'01021060o
Q
nw;
-
.
..-
-
..
.. =-
.
>j
.
.
Arkansas Power and Light Company
2
September 5, 1980
Should you have'any questions concerning this material, we will be glad to
' discuss them with.you.
Sincerely,
,f.
'
0&
,
G. L. Madsen, Chief
Reactor Operations and
Nuclear Support Branch
Enclosures.
1.
Performance Evaluation - Arkansas
Nuclear One, August 1980:
2.
IE Inspection Report Nos.
50-313/80-14 and 50-368/80-14
cc w/ enclosures:
James P. O'Hanlon, Plant Manager
P. O. Box 608
Russellville, Arkansas
72801
.
)
.
.a
j
_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
ENCLOSURE 1
,
.
Parform:nca Evaluation
Arkansas Nuclear One
August 1980'
REGION
IV
LICENSEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (OPERATIONS)
Facility:
Arkansas Nuclear One
Licensee:
Arkansas Power and Light Company
Unit Identification:
Docket No.
' License No./Date of Issuance
Unit No.
50-313
DPR 51/May 21, 1974
1
50-368
NPF 6/ September 1, 1978
2
Reactor Information:
Unit 1
Unit 2
Unit 3
MWt
-2568
2815
Appraisal Period:
January 1, 1979 through August 19, 1980
Acoraisal Comoletion Date:
August 19, 1980
Review ~ Board Members:
G. L. Madsen, Chief, Reactor Operations & Nuclear Support Branch, RIV
D. M. Hunnicutt, Chief, Reactor Projects Section #2, RONSB, RIV
J. E. Gagliardo, Chief, Nuclear Support Section, RONSB, RIV
- l
R. E. Martin, Proj ect Manager, NRR
j
G. S. Vissing,- Proj ect Manager, . NRR
i
W. D. Johnson, Senior Resident Inspector, RONSB, RIV
j
L. J. Callan, Resident Inspector, RONSB RIV
l
!
.
A.
Numoer and Nature of Noncomoliance Itams
Noncomolianca category:
Unit 1 (only)
Unit 2(only)
Unit 1 & 2
Violations
0
0
0
Infractions
13
18
26
Deficiencies
2
0
2
Areas of Noncomolianca:
Unit 1 (only)
Unit 2 (only)
Unit 1 & 2
(List Areas as Required)
Management Control
2
1
Plant Operations
5
7
Maintenance
1
2
1
Surveillance Testing
1
4
2
Training
i
1
Radiation Protection
2
2
5
Emergency Planning
2
Fire Protection
1
1
1
Security
1
13
Design Change
2
Committee Activities
3
Total
15
18
28
3.
Numoer and Nature of Licensee Event Recorts
,
Type of Events:
Unit 1
Unit 2
Unit 3
Personnel errors
14
19
Defective crocedures
4
3
Casually-linked events
5
6
Licensee Event Recorts Reviewed (Recort Nos. )
l
50-313/79-01
through 50-313/79-24
50-313/80-01
through . 50-313/80-25
50-313/80-28
50-368/79-01
through 50-368/79-104
,
50-368/80-01
through 50-368/80-46
_l
'
50-368/80-49
.
-_
-_.
.
-
C.
Escalated Enforcement Actions
Civil Penalties
None.
Orders
None.
Immediate Action Letters
None.
D.
Manacement Conferences Held During Past Twelve Months
Conference held in RIV offices (at the licensee's request) on August 11, 1980
to discuss possible excalated enforcement action from Inspection 80-12 and
licensee's presentation of plans for upgrading training.
E.
Justification of Evaluations of Functional Areas Catecorized as Recuiring
an increase in Insoection Frecuencv/Scoce ( See evaluation sneets )
Training - The licensee's training program, management's overview of the
training area, and the overall effectiveness of the training
program have been weak.
i
Security - The licensee's security program has not been fully implemented
and not all of the prescribed security =easures have been estab-
lished.
Reporting - The extent of management's overview in this area and the communi-
cations between individuals with responsibilities in this area
have been weak and have led to reporting inadequacies.
Quality Control ' - The licensee's program in this area, the extent of manage-
ment's overview, and the attitude toward assuring an effective
-l
inspection program have been weak.
..
. . _ .
_
_ _ .
_ _ . _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
- _ _ _ _ _
__
.
k
Inspection
i
Frecuency and/or $ccoe
{
FUNCTIONAL AREA
Increasa
No. Change
Oecrease
.
1.
Management Control
l
l
X
l
1
-
I
2.
Plant Operations
'
4
x
3.
Refueling Ocerations & Activities
x
j
1
Maintenanca
x
.
j
5.
Surveillance & Preoperational Testing
l
x
5.
Training
x
l
7.
Radiation Protection
l
x
3.
Environmental Protection
t
X
t
c-
,
9.
Emergency Planning
x
2
10.
Fire Protection
i
x
i
11.
Security & Safeguards
x
.,
4'
12.
Design Changes & Modifications
x
i
j
13.
Reporting
x
{
14.
QA Audits-
x
}
15.
Committee Activities-
x
i
15.
Quality Control
x
17.
Procurement
l
x
4
1
l
2
j
.a
,
!
r l
? U@J
G. L. Madsen, Chief RONSB
,
jf s to
Cate
.
.
, . ,
~.
,.
-
,
, --
-
. . , - . _ , . . , . .