IR 05000254/1982011
| ML20028A740 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Quad Cities |
| Issue date: | 05/31/1982 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028A739 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-254-82-11, 50-265-82-12, NUDOCS 8211240344 | |
| Download: ML20028A740 (6) | |
Text
a
.
.
, ',,
-
/.' /
'
s-
,
tl'
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.t
>
,
,
s
REGION III
,
..
'
<,
.
$/ +
- 3
>
i-
.,
)
>
<
-3,.
j
.
.I s
SYSTEMATIC ASSE.SSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANC_E_.. '
i i
i Commonwealth Edison Company T
$
'
,
QUAD-CITIES NUCLEAR POWER PIANT
/
Docket Nos. 50-254; 50-265 Report Nos. 50-254/82-11; 50-265/82-12 Assessment Period
a
+ July 1, 1980 to December 31, 1981
.
,!.
e
s
.
'
'
h
.
.
,
.
May 1982
-
,,
/
f
<
.
e 8211240344 821118
~~
PDR ADOCK 05000254 G
.
.
ERRATA SIIEET Facility: Quad-Cities Nuclear Power Plant SALP Report No.
50-254/82-11; 50-265/82-12 Page Line Now Reads Should Read
35
--operators may be distracted
--operators from their from their assigned duties.
assigned duties.
+
/
$
I l
t l
I (
l i
l s
i
.
.
CONTENTS Page i
1.
SALP Board Chairman Letter to Licensee.....................
iii 2.
Licensee Comments vi
..........................................
I.
Introduction..........................................
II.
Criteria..............................................
.
III. Summary of Results....................................
IV.
Performance Analyses..................................
V.
Supporting Data and Summaries
.........................
A.
Noncompliance Data...............................
B.
Licensee Report Data.............................
C.
Licensee Activities
..............................
D.
Inspection Activities............................
E.
Investigations and Allegations Review............
F.
Escalated Enforcement Action.....................
G.
Management Conferences
...........................
i I
i l
l I
e
!
I f
a li
,
,
...,..., _ _ _, _ _ _,,_..,. - _, - - - - - - - ~
_ _. _.,-.
,
-m_.,
,.,.. _
-.m-y,_
.-.._.--y~._
___.-_,_y-
-
r..
-, -, -,, - - -
_
-
=
_
__
.- _
-
N
.
.
i Docket No. 50-254 Docket No. 50-265 Commonwealth Edison Company ATTN:
Mr. Cordell Reed Vice President Post Office Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Gentlemen:
This is to confirm the conversation between you and Mr. R. C. Knop of the Region III staff scheduling June 2, 1982 at 1:00 p.m. as the date and time to discuss the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) for the Quad-Cities Nuclear Station. This meeting is to be held at the Region III Offices, Glen Ellyn, Illinois.
Mr. J. G. Keppler, Regional Administrator and members of the NRC staff will present the observations and findings of the SALP Board.
Since this meeting is intended to be a forum for the mutual understanding of the issues and findings, you are encouraged to have appropriate representation at the meeting. As a minimum we would suggest you, Mr. A. Gerner, Plant Superintendent for Administration, or G. Taleski, Security Administrator, and managers for the various functional areas where problems have been identified.
The enclosed SALP Report, which documents the findings of the SALP Board, is for your review prior to the meeting. Subsequent to the meeting the SALP Report will be issued by the Regional Administrator.
Enclosure 1 to this letter summarizes the more significant findings iden-tified in the SALP Board's evaluation of the Quad-Cities Nuclear Station for the period of July 1, 1980 to December 31, 1981.
If you desire to make comments concerning our evaluation of your facility, they should be submitted to this office within twenty days of the meeting date. Otherwise, it will be assumed that you have no comments.
!
111
. _ _ _
_ _.. _. - -. _. _ _ _ _.,
. _ _ _
.
_.. _
_.
.
.
..
,
_____
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -. _
.
.
Commonwealth Edison Company
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, the SALP Report, and your comments, if any, will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room when the SALP Report is issued.
The comments requested by this letter are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-5111.
If you have any questions concerning the SALP Report of the Quad-Cities Nuclear Station we will be happy to discuss them with you.
Sincerely, J. A. Hind, Director Division of Emergency Preparedness and Operational Support Enclosures:
1.
Significant Findings 2.
Quad-Cities SALP Report (5 copies)
cc w/encis:
Resident Inspector, RIII iv
.
.
ENCIOSURE 1 While no significant weaknesses were identified during the July 1, 1980 to December 31, 1981 assessment period and the licensee's performance in plant operations continued at a high level, several functional areas were identified where licensee attention is required to ensure continued improvement.
Functional Areas Radiological Controls Improvements were noted in this area in the latter part of the SALP period.
This appears to be the result of a positive attitude by management and the commitment of additional resources. Continued licensee attention is recommended to ensure the continuation of this positive trend.
Maintenance Problems were noted in the first twelve months of the assessment period, particularly with valve operability. A few problems were also experienced during nonroutine maintenance. Experience in the last six months of the period showed a significant reduction in these problems and appears to indicate improvements in the maintenance program.
Licensee attention is required to ensure continuing this positive trend.
Fire Protection A number of problems were identified which indicated veaknesses in the fire protection program. The main finding was not with specific problems but with the licensee's ability to detect and correct problems before they were 1denti-fled by the NRC. Attention to this area is recommended.
Later inspections will. enable the detection of trends in the program.
Emergency Preparedness Management involvement was evident in meeting the requirements of the early warning system and development of a program once the licensee was convinced the revised due date pas firm. A failure to take advantage of previous findings at other licensee sites is an indication of a possible communica-tion problem or possible lapse in management attention. Continued management attention is recommended to insure the timely resolution of the deficiencies identified in the Emergency Preparedness Appraisal.
Security and Safeguards Eleven noncompliances were identified during six inspections in this area, indicating that the licensee's involvement was somewhat deficient. However, improvements we;< acted during the last part of the assessment period which weighed heavily in not assigning Category 3 to this area. These improvements need to continue.
v