IR 05000280/1991008
| ML18153C672 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 07/02/1991 |
| From: | Ebneter S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Stewart W VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9107160331 | |
| Download: ML18153C672 (37) | |
Text
,-
JUL o 2 1991 Docket Nos. 50-280, 50-281 License Nos. DPR-32, DPR-37 Virginia Electric and Power Company ATTN:
Mr. W. L. Stewart Senior Vice President - Nuclear 5000 Dominion Boulevard Glen Allen, VA 23060 Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE (NRC INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-280/91-08 AND 50-281/91-08)
This refers to the NRC 1 s Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP)
Report for your Surry facility which was sent to you on May 23, 1991; our meeting on June 17, 1991, at which we discussed this report; and your written comments in a letter dated July 2, 199 Thank you for your review of the SALP repor Since you had no negative or corrective comments on the report, the Initial SALP Report transmitted to you on May 23, 1991, becomes the Final SALP Repor The enclosures consist of a meeting summary, the SALP presentation slides, and a copy of your written comment No reply to this letter is required; however, should you have any questions, I will be pleased to discuss them with yo
Enclosures:
Meeting Summary SALP Presentation Slides Ucensee SALP Response dated July 2, 1991
REGION II ORGANIZATION
'
Ff ICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR :
ADMINISTRATOR S. EBNETER DEPUTY J. MILHOAN
_T ___ ---
I DIVISION OF REACTOR PROJECTS DI L. REYES DEPUTY E. MEAICHOFF,
I DIVISION OF REACTOR SAFETY DI A. GIBSON DEPUTY J. JOHNSON T"'- PROJECTS CHIEF I. WILSOfll DIVIIIOlril OF RADIATION SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS DI J. STOHR DEPUTY 8. MALLETT
I
-
DIVISION OF REACTOR PROJECTS ORGANIZATION
DIVISION OF REACTOR PROJECTS DI L. REYES I
DEPUTY E. MERSCHOFF i PROJECTS SECTION NO. 2A CHIEF P. FREORICKSO~
NORTH ANNA SURRY REACTOR PROJECTS BRANCH NO. 2
--
CHIEF M. 81NKULE PROJECTS SECTION NO. 28 CHIEF R. CRLENJAK ST. LUCIE CRYSTAL RIVER TURKEY POINT
- NRR. ORGANIZATION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION DIR. T. MURLEY p
---
-*
'
ASSOC. DIRECTOR FOR PROJECTS J. PARTLOW F:
DIVISION OF REACTOR PROJECTS 1/11 S. "'RGA, DIR. 1/11 G. LAINAS,. ASST. DIR. II H. BERKOW, DIR. 11-2 B. BUCKLEY, PROJ. MG SURRY DIVISION OF REACTOR PROJECTS Ill/IV IV ANO SPECIAL PROJECTS ASSOC. DIRECTOR FOR INSPECTION AND TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT DIVISION OF ENGINEERING TEC.HNOLOGY DIVISION OF
-- OPERATIONAL EVENTS ASSESSMENT I
I---
DIVISION OF REACTOR INSPECTION AND SAFEGUARDS
* *-
- -. --
.
DIVISION OF RADIATION PROTECTION AND MERGENCY PREPAREDNESS DIVISION OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE ANO QUALITY E~LUATION I
~IVISION OF SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY
.
.
I
'
-*
-PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS AREAS FOR OPERATING REACTORS -
A. PLANT OPERATIONS 8. RADIOLOGICAL CONTROLS C. MAINTENANCE/SURVEILLANCE -
D. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS E. SECURITY F. ENGINEERING/TECHNICAL SUPPORT G. SAFETY ASSESSMENT /QUALITY VERIFICATION
I C
AREA PERFORMANCE CATEGORY 1 *
LICENSEE MANAGEMENT ATTENTION TO AND INVOLVEMENT IN NUCLEAR-SAFETY OR SAFEGUARDS ACTIVITIES RESULTED IN A SUPERIOR LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE-.
NRG WILL CONSIDER REDUCED LEVELS OF INSPECTION EFFOR I
'
AREA PERFORMANCE CATEGORY 2 LICENSEE MANAGEMENT ATTENTION TO AND INVOLVEMENT IN NUCLEAR SAFETY OR SAFEGUARDS ACTIVITIES RESULTED IN A GOOD LEVEL OF PERFORMANC * NRC WILL CONSIDER MAINTAINING
- NORMAL LEVELS OF INSPECTION EFFOR I
- ~-------
AREA. PERFORMANCE CATEGORY 3 LICENSEE MANAGEMENT ATTENTION TO.
AND INVOLVEMENT IN NUCLEAR SAFETY OR SAFEGUARDS ACTIVITIES RESULTED IN AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE; HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF THE NRC'S CONCERN THAT A DECREASE IN PERFORMANCE MAY APPROACH OR REACH AN UNACCEPTABLE LEVEL, NRC WILL CONSIDER INCREASED LEVELS OF INSPECTION EFFOR *e*
EVALUATION CRITERIA
1. MANAGEMENT INVOLVEMENT AND CONTROL
. IN ASSURING QUALITY i
2. APPROACH TO IDENTIFICATION AND
.
r RESOLUTION OF TECHNICAL ISSUES FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT 3. ENFORCEMENT HISTORY 4. REPORTING, ANALYSIS AND CORRECTIVE ACTION OF REPORTABLE EVENTS 5. STAFFING (INCLUDING MANAGEMENT)
6. TRAINING EFFECTIVENESS AND QUALIFICATION
COMP FAILUf<l'
35%
Di ~IGN/
c,*)NST %
SURRY APf<lL l. 1990 - MARCH 30. 1991 (CYCLE 10)
.. - - - -........... - -......... -
PERSONNEL 61%
-. -...
.
- . J
'*.* OPERATING l MAINT. 3 TEST /CALIB 10
____.----
PERSONNEL (14)
TOTAL (23)
LERs
' ' '
I I
I
'*
.,
VIOLATION SUMMARY (CYCLE 10).
.
I I
I I
APRIL 1, 1990 THROUGH MARCH 30, 1991 II 111 IV V
SURRY
0
8
REGION II AV <1
<1 PER OPERATING UNIT FOR ASSESSMENT PERIOD I
r I
I I
.
I I
'
.
'
r
FUNCTIOI\\JAL AREA DISTRIBUTION
. For Eighteen Region II Sites
!*~:ALP CYCLES 8 AND 9 Number ot Sites 1 4, r-------------------------..... --
---.. -------------------------------------------------------------------* -.. -* * -* -* ----*..
- I 1 2 ;
I 10 '
8.
4 ;
i
'
2 !
,-
OPS r~AD *
M.'S EP SEC ENG/TS SA/QV Functional Areas 1111 CATEGORY 1 c:J CATEGORY 2
-
CATEGORY 3
\\,
FACILITY PERFORMANCE I SU'MMARY SURRY RATING LAST FUNCTIONAL AREA PERIOD,
PLANT. OPERATIONS
(OPERATIONS & FIRE PROTECTION)
RADIOLOGICAL CONTROLS 20)
MAINTENANCE/SURVEILLANCE 3(1)
SECURITY
ENGINEERING/TECHNICAL SUPPORT
(ENGINEERING, TRAINING & OUTAGES)
SAFETY ASSESSMENT/
QUALITY VERIFICATION -
(QUALITY PROGRAMS & LICENSING)
RATING THIS PERIOD 2(1)
2
1
2'(1)
.
.
'.
OPERATIONS*
(CATEGORY 2 - IMPROVING)
STRENGTHS
- MANAGEMENT SAFETY ATTITUDE TOWARD OPERATIONS
- DELEGATION OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY
- SHIFT LICENSED STAFFING LEVELS
- OPERATOR RESPONSES TO EVENTS
- OPERATIONS COMPUTER PROGRAMS
- OPERATIONS TECHNICAL PROCEDURES UPGRADE
...
.
.
...
.
.
e.
OPERATIONS
(CON'T)
( CATEGORY 2 - IMPROVING)
CHALLENGES
- PLANT COMPONENT LABELING
- EMERGENCY OPERATING -
PROCEDURES
- OPERATOR ATTENTIVENESS
- GENERAL HOUSEKEEPING
...
.
.
.. '
RADIOLOGICAL CONTROL ( CATEGORY 1)
STRENGTHS
- INVOLVEMENT OF STATION MANAGEMENT i
- RADIOLOGICAL PROBLEM SELF-IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM
- SELF-ASSESSMENT AND QA INVOLVEMENT
- EXPERIENCE BASE OF HP STAFF
- HP TRAINING FOR STATION PERSONNEL
- SOURCE TERM REDUCTION EFFORT
- STATION ALARA PROGRAM
- LOW COLLECTIVE DOSE
-
..
J
L RADIOLOGICAL CONTROL (CON'T)
- ( CATEGORY 1)
- PERSONNEL AND AREA CONTAMINATION CONTROL
- HP PERFORMANCE DURING UNIT 1 OUTAGE
- CONTROL OF RADIOACTIVE EFFLUENT
- * PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CHEMISTRY PROGRAMS
- NEW RADWASTE BUILDING
- ENGINEERING COORDINATION INVOLVING HP PROBLEMS CHALLENGE
- MATERIAL CONDITION EFFECT ON RADIOLOGICAL CONTROLS
...
'
..
,;
J MAINTENANCE/
SURVEILLANCE ( CATEGORY 2)
- sTRENGTHS
- MOV PROGRAM
- MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT POLICIES
- PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
- SITE SERVICES PERFORMANCE
- MAINTENANCE STAFF TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION PROGRAfv1
..
,,
'
MAINTENANCE/
. SURVEILLANCE (CON'T)
(CATEGORY 2)
CHALLENGES
- MAINTENANCE BACKLOG
- PARTS AVAILABILITY
. * MATERIAL CONDITION
- MAINTENANCE TRENDING AND COMPONENT FAILURE EVALUATION PROGRAMS
- ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURAL COMPLIANCE
..
.
- '
l L
MAINTENANCE/
SURVEILLANCE (CON'T)
(CATEGORY 2)
- UPGRADE OF PROCEDURES IN l&C
- PLANNING AND SCHEDULING OF WORK
- POST-MAINTENANCE TEST PROGRAM
- SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM
'
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS (CATEGORY 1)
STRENOTHS
- MANAGEMENT SUPPORT OF PROGRAM
- CORPORATE AND SITE STAFFING LEVELS
- COMPREHENSIVE INTEGRATED REVIEW OF PROGRAM
- CORRECTIVE ACTION TO ROUTINE AND EXERCISE FINDINGS *
-
- LICENSEE INITIATIVES
..
"
,
.
.
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS (CON'T)
- ( CAT'EGORY 1)
- STAFF AUGMENTATION DRILLS
- MAINTENANCE OF RESPONSE FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT*
- EMERGENCY EXERCISE CHALLENGE
- CONTINUE MANAGEMENT SUPPORT *
- .
fl
'
SECURITY (CON'T)
( CATEGORY 1)
.
- DEVELOPMENT OF SECURITY PLAN REVIEWS
- FITNESS FOR DUTY PROGRAM
- CONTROL OF SPECIAL NUCLE:AR MATERIAL CHALLENGE
- MAINTAIN LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE
- SECURIT (CATEGORY 1)
STRENGTHS
- SECURITY PERSONNEL PERFORMANCE AND PROGRAM
- CORPORATE AND STATION
- MANAGEMENT SUPPORT. OF PROGRAM
-
- PERSONNEL STAFFING AND TRAINING
- QA AUDITS
~.
.
.
..
,,
I ENGINEERING/
TECHNICAL SUPPORT ( CATEGORY 2)
STRENGTHS
- COMPONENT FAILURE EVALUATION PROGRAM
- SYSTEM ENGINEERING
- ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT OF SELF -ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES
- REACTIVITY MANAGEMENT
- PROGRESS IN DESIGN BASIS DOCUMENTATION PROGRAM
..
.
~
L
_ ENGINEERING/
TECHNICAL SUPPORT (CON'T)
(CATEGORY 2)
- ENGINEERING ORGANIZATION STAFFING
- LICENSED OPERATOR TRAINING PROGRAM CHALLENGES
- DECISIONS -INVOLVING SERVICE WATER SYSTEM TESTING
- NEW SETPOINT CONTROL PROCEDURES
.,
...
..
'
..
,,
..
'
.
ENGINEERING/
TECHNICAL SUPPORT
. (CON'T)
(CATEGORY. 2)
.
- DESIGN CHANGE PACKAGE SUPPORT
- TECHNICAL PROCEDURE UPGRADE PROGRAM
- CORPORATE ENGINEERING EFFECT ON ENGINEERING PERFORMANCE
- ENGINEERING PERFORMANCE DURING UNIT 1 REFUELING
- OUTAGE
I*
!
i
..
.
"
..,
'1' *
..
'
SAFETY ASSESSMENT/
QUALITY VERIFICATION (CATEGORY 2 - IMPROVING)
STRENGTHS
- O~J8.JTE S.AFETY REVIEWS
- SENIOR PLANT AND CORPORATE MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE
- DECREASE IN EVENTS
- CHANGE IN THE RATIO OF NRG-TO-LICENSEE IDENTIFIED VIOLATIONS
- SELF-ASSESSMENT CAPABILITY
- CORRECTION OF QA AUDIT FINGINGS
. '
.
.
'
.
~
. e... SAFETY ASSESSMENT/
- QUALITY VERIFICATION (CON'T)
(CATEGORY 2 - IMPROVING)
- QA PRCJGRAlv1 CHALLENGES
- EFFECTIVENESS OF CORRECTIVE ACTION
- EFFECTIVENESS OF COMMITMENT TR-ACKING SYSTEM
- LICENSING SUBMITTAL TIMELINESS AND/OR COMPLETENESS
- EFF~CTIVENESS OF ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS PROGRAM
II I. ;,
~,
..
ENCLOSURE 3
\\'rRGISIA ELECTRIC A.SD POWER lOMPA~Y RICHMOND, 'V1ROI.S'IA 23261 July 2, 1991 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II
101 Marietta Street NW Suite 2900*
Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Gentlemen:
VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 Serial N NL&P/CGL Docket No License No RESPONSE TO INSPECTION REPORT 50-280 & 2s1191.os
- SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE 91-309 A2 50-280 50-281 DPR-32 DPR-37 Virginia Electric and Power Company has reviewed the report on the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) for Surry Power Station for the period April 1, 1990 through March 31, 1991 and has no specific comments. As we have
- noted in the past, we consider the SALP process to be a very useful and important tool for both the NRC and Virginia Electric and Power Company in assessing and improving performance and safety at our nuclear station We believe we have made significant improvements in performance at Surry during this SALP period and appreciate the NRC's recognition of this progress. Our plan is to continue this positive perforn:,ance and further strive to improve on those items identified as requiring increased management attention. It is our intention to provide periodic status to you regarding our progress in these areas during future management meeting Very truly yours, I
~
'.
,\\. ~-
\\. I
"\\
I
\\',_
-
J
.\\.J W. L. Stewart Senior Vice President * Nuclear