IR 05000289/1975019
| ML19256D575 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 08/13/1975 |
| From: | Spessard R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19256D574 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-75-19, NUDOCS 7910190543 | |
| Download: ML19256D575 (5) | |
Text
'
.
t:
L-IE:I Form 12'
.
l (Jan 75) (Rev)
.
.
,
f
.
-
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO.T!ISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTIO'i AND ENFORCDIENT
'
REGION I
.
.
I'
IE Inspection Report.No:
50-289/75-19 Docket No:
50-289 Licensee: Metropolitan Edison Comeany License No:
- P. O. Box 542 Priority:
Reading, Pennsylvania 19603 Ca tegory:
C Safeguards
_
Location: Three Mile Island 1. Middletown. Pennsvivania
~
-
Type of Licensee: PWR 871 MWe (B&lJ)
Im. of Inspection: Management Meetine
,
-
Da'.
af Inspection:
July 30, 1975
.'
- .;
Di s of Previous Inspection:
July 30-31, August 1,1975
' [////7I
'
Reporting Inspector:
4 4ff.
_,
t
-
R.L.Spessard[ReactorInspector DATE A
/7/75 Accompanying Inspectors:
/b -
~~
l unner, Chief, Reactor Operations Branch DATE E. J:j
-
Br,L -
f(.0 4 !.v A R/}2 / 2(
.
A.
B'. Davis, Senior Reactor Inspector DATE X 14dM6 lif1 V F.J.Nolan,'jdeniorReactorInspectionSpecialist DATE
//!7E
Other Accompanying ?ersonnel:
C- % cr A. C. Ellingsp6, NRC Consultant DATE
, ~, c,
'I
/*
/
I Reviewed By:
-A E. J. 3 runner, Chief, Reactor Operations Branch DATE
-
1451 326
'
7910190
.-
.
.
-
... -
.
o-s
\\
~
<
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Enforcement Action None Other Significant Findings A.
Current Findings g.;.
Not applicable E
i;
"
B.
Management Meeting t:::
The management meeting requested by Region I was conducted at the
corporate offices of Metropolitan Edison Company, Reading, Pennsyl-
[;}.
vania on July 30, 1975.
The following personnel were in attendance:
y.
p Meuropolitan Edison Company i..
Mr. R. C. Arnold, Vice President
Mr. R. M. Klingaman, Manager, Generation Engineering (
Mr. L. L. Lawyer, Manager, Operational Quality Assqrance L._.
,
._
Mr. J. G. Herbein, Manager, Generation Operations - Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. E. J. Brunner, Chief, Reactor Operations Branch, Region I Mr. A. B. Davis, Senior Reactor Inspector, Region I Mr. R. L. Spessard, Reactor Inspe-tor, Region I
-
Mr. F. J. Nolan, Senior Reactor Inspection Specialist, HQ
?
.
Mr. A. C. Ellingson, Consultant Purpose and Scope A meeting was held with Met Ed management to discuss a new inspection program to be Laplemented at THI-l on a trial basis for a,one year period with the first inspection beginning in September 1975.
..
Dir".ssion Items
.. _
Specific items discussed are summarized below:
1451 327
.
.
. en
...
-
,p
-
i:
-2-
,
)
.%_
+
%
A.
Purpose of the Statistical Sampling Inspection Program (SSIP)
,..
1.
Determine feasibility of a SSIP to support a numerical confi-is dence level statement regarding the effectiveness of an inspec-tion program to determine a degree of compliance by the licensee.
2.
Specifically the confidence level statement is as follows:
k
.
Inspection of licensee compliance with NRC _ requirements is such that there is at least an X% probability of detecting if the licensee is less than Y% in compliance over a one year period.
==
B.
Description of the One Year Inspection Program
.j 1.
Program is made up of the SSIP and a portion of the routine
,
uniform inspection program (RUIP) applied to all operating facilities.
I5
.
g 2.
Special inspections will continue to be performed as needed.
.
i 3.
The SSIP encompasses inspections in the areas of:
{
a.
License conditions.
g
,
.
b.
Technical Specification requirements.
- "
c.
10 CFR 19, 20, 50, 55, 71 and 73.
~
d.
Security plan.
-
e.
FSAR Chapter 12.
f.
QA for operations.
4.
The portion of the RUIP encompasses:
.
a.
Nonroutine events.
b.
Bulletin follow-up.
Noncompliance / Deviation follow-up.
c.
d.
Independent inspection effort.
-
e.
Training.
f.
Plant operations.
,
g.
Logs and records.
h.
Review and audits.
~
1.
Committee activities.
C.
Insnection Effort
'
l.
Expected to be about the same as the complete RUIP.
.
1451 328
.
%
.
y
.
,
[ ;.
5:.
-3-
. (q p
t ll G'
{..
D.
SSIP Discussion l'
=
1.
About 2500 inspectable elements were identified from areas
' [ ~.
.
described in B.3 above and were stored in random sequence in computer.
,,
2.
A sufficient number of these elements was randomly selected
-
by computer to provide a 95/96 confidence level statement.
k.t" 3.
Inspection procedures were developed for th'e elements to be inspected.
p E.
Method of Inspection E
is 1.
Same as now.
Project and specialist inspectors will perform I,,
the SSIP and RUIP.
h==
E5-2.
Audits performed on selected inspector findings.
[f P
F.
Method of Documentation'
{
Same as used for other facilities.
..
r::.=.
G.
Enforcement l
,
[
..
,
-
1.
Same as now - reference 12/21/74 letter from Dr. Knuth to
~
licensees.
H.
Licensee Comment 1.
Encouraged at any time during the year.
.
2.
Meeting after six months to discuss program.
I.
End Objective
,
1.
Cost benefit analysis - is SSIP of sufficient merit to apply nationwide?
.
Specific comments and/or concerns expressed by Met Ed management included th(.ollowing:
- - -
-
A.
Met Ed would like a copy of the 2500 element population.
B.
Met Ed would like to know under which program (SSIP or RUIP) an Item of Noncompliance, when identified, war, detected.
--
~
,
1451 329
.
!
.
-4-
.('"'g g
)
'._J C.
Met Ed expressed concern that the program puts the same importance relative to noncompliance on an item required to be done daily and items required to be done at lesser frequencies (quarterly, semi-i."
annually, ar.d annually).
Met Ed intends to evaluate this program further, and if warranted, may object to its implementation at TMI-1.
,
D.
Met Ed expressed a general concern that the NRC inspection program was not taking advantage of the Quality Assurance Program being implemented by licensees to meet NRC requirements.
The licensee was advised that his comments and/or concerns would be evaluated.
s kik
a..-
n
-
1451
'30
++
.
i
'
(
i=
-
,
_...
.
,,se,
..
i-e
e e
o d'
. _.
.