ML20129J040
Text
-
}
E
['
.O
- LIMITED DISTRIBUTIONX No,t4&Public R)e e3EreE
\\
DRAFTS.-' PREDECIS1TiNAL INFORMA' PION
]
October 1, 1990 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Luis A. Reyes, Director Division of Reactor Projects Region II FROM:
Chris'A. VanDenburgh,-Chief A.
Reactive. Inspection.Section - 2 V Vendor Inspection Branch
~
i Division of Reactor Inspections and-Safeguards
SUBJECT:
VOGTLE SPECIAL TEAM INSPECTION - ALLEGATION FOLLOWUP TEAM j
DRAFT INSPECTION REPORT (INSPECTION REPORT NOS.
50-424/90-xx AND 50-425/90-xx) q
' This memorandum refers to the special inspection conducted on August'6 through 17, 1990,'at'the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant.
(VEGP)'. - This inspection involved a review of several allegations
-regarding the safe operation of VEGP and the review of operational activities generally related to the. allegations.
As discussed in the' inspection plan, the inspection was performed by two separate' teains--an operational followup and an allegation followup team.
At the conclusion of the inspection, all..of the inspection team's conclusions with respect to the operations and allegation followup were ' discussed with the members VEGP's staff identified in the enclosed draft' inspection report.
!As decided in a meeting held in Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) headquarters on September 26,<1990, the allegation followup team's findings ~ and conclusions have not been included in Inspection-
' Report 424/90-19; 50-425/90-19. This information has been withheld pending the completion of an Office of Investigation review of the allegations.and the inspection team's conclusions. This memorandum forwards a draft' inspection report (50-424/90-xx; 50-425/90-xx) which ' documents the - inspection team's review and conclusions regarding.the allegations as of the time of the inspection exit meeting'on' August 17, 1990.
The areas examined during _.the inspection are identified in the j
inspection report.
As discussed in Inspection Report 50-424/90-j 19; 50-425/90-19, the inspection team concluded that the facility
,was-safely operated.
However, the inspection identified several-instances in which~ the VEGP was not operated -in accordance with the intent of the.. Technical Specifications.
. In
- addition, the
~ inspection identified. several potential ' weaknesses in the
' facilities' operational policies and practices.
m
(
,j LIMITED TRIBUTI
- Not F u
Release JM x
1
/
T q
m e
, 96 1 7 960827
- P F
A
)
S-11
._PDR 4
i i
h.
. LIMITED. DISTRIBUTION - Not For.Public Release b-DRAFT - PREDECIGIOl{AL INFOR!$TI' ss
'Luis A..Reyes '
'The' inspection team's review of the allegations identified several j
additional weaknesses. in these operational policies and practices.
These are - identified in the' inspection summary of the. enclosed i
draft inspection report.
Based on the results of this inspection of the allegations, certain activities appeared-to be in violation of NRC requirements, as specified in the enclosed draft Notice of Violation (Notice).
These violations are important because they indicate (1) a failure
.to implement the requirements of the Technical specifications and 4
administrative procedures, and (2) the failure to provide accurate information to the NRC.
As part. of the response to the violations identified in the
-enclosed notice, VEGP should also be requested to address each of the concerns listed in the inspection summary.
Enclosures:
1.
Draft Notice'of. Violation 2.
Draft Inspection Report 50-424/90-xx; 50-425/90-xx I
cc:
BKGrimes EWBrach t
l M IMITED QISTRIBUT C ND gy
p-l}
[
LTMITED DISTRIBUTI9N h t For P
'c Release l-
\\_.
-DRAFT -NPREDECISION d ORMATI l
l l
1 i
i 1
C?Ehht Nxurux W RII/DRP RII/DRP RII/DRP JWilcox*
RAiello*
RStarkey*
MBranch*
9/4S/90 8/31/90' 8/31/90 8/31/90 RII/DRP RII/DRS NRR/DLPQ RII/DRS LGarnero MThomas*
NHunemuller*
PTaylor*
9/27/90 8/31/90 8/31/90 8/31/90 RII/DRP NRR/DRI RCarroll*
CVanQe h
I 8/31/90 9/p$/90 I
1
- See previous. concurrences l
.l LIMITED DISTRIBUTION - Not Fo ublic Release p/
i