IR 05000400/1988017
| ML18005A710 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 11/21/1988 |
| From: | Ernst M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Utley E CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8811300045 | |
| Download: ML18005A710 (55) | |
Text
.; p C CELE RATED.
DISTKBUTtON DEMONSTRATION SYSTEM REGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (RIDE)
!,s'CCESSION NBR:8811300045 DOC.DATE: 88/11/21 NOTARIZED: NO DOCKET FACIL:50-400 'Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Carolina 05000400 AUTH.NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION ERNSTFM.L.
Region 2, Ofc of the Director
. RECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION UTLEY,E.E.
Carolina Power 6 Light Co.
SUBJECT: Discusses SALP Rept 50-400/88-17 a forwards summary of 880916 meeting,SALP presentation slides
& 881028 response.
DISTRIBUTION CODE:
ZE40D COPIES RECEIVED:LTR + ENCL Q SIZE:
TITLE: Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) Report NOTES:Application for permit renewal filed.
D 05000400 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME PD2-1 LA BUCKLEY,B INTERNAL: ACRS AEOD/DSP/TPAB DEDRO NRR/DLPQ/HFB 10 NRR/DOEA/EAB 11 NRR/DREP/RPB
NRR/DRIS/RSGB
NRR/DRIS/SIB 9A NUDOCS-ABSTRACT OGC/HDS1 RGN2 FILE
EXTERNAL: H ST LOBBY WARD NRC PDR COPIES LTTR ENCL
0
1
1
1
1
11'
RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME PD2-1 PD
AEOD/DOA
COMMZSSION
NRR MORISSEAU,D
NRR/DLPQ/PEB 11
NRR/DREP/EPB
1 NRR/DRIS DIR 9A
NRR/DRIS/SGB 9D
NRR/PMAS/ILRB12
OE LIEBERMAN,J
~RE~
1 LPDR NSIC COPIES LTTR ENCL
1
1
5
1
1 1-
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
D NCTE 'ZO AIL "RIDS" RECZPZENTS PLEASE HELP US Z0 RE%KB HASTE)
CGMZACZ~ DOCUMEÃZ (XKZROL DESK, RXN P1-37 (EZZ. 20079) m EKaIMINATE YOUR NAME PKH DISTRIBUTION LTSTS H2t DOCUMENTS YOU DGNFT NEEDt S
TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED:.LTTR
ENCL
November 21, 1988 Carolina Power and Light Company
~
~
~
~
ATTN:
Mr. E.
E. Utley Senior Executive Vice President Power Supply and Engineering and Construction P. 0.
Box 1551 Raleigh, NC 27602 Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSFE PERFORMANCE NO. 50-400/88-17 The NRC's Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) Report for the Shearon Harris facility was sent to you on September 16, 1988, and the results of the assessment were presented on September 27, 1988, at the Harris Energy and Environmental Center.
Enclosures
and 2 contain the Meeting Summary and a
copy of the SALP Presentation Slides.
Your written response to the SALP Report, dated October 28, 1988, (Enclosure 3)
has been reviewed and is discussed below.
Enclosure 4 contains the SALP Report errata with the corrected pages.
We appreciate the time and effort you have taken to review the SALP report and to consider our general performance comments presented at the September 27'eeting.
The following is our evaluation of your specific comments:
Radiolo ical Controls:
You stated that the rating in this functional area appeared to be too heavily weighted by the NRC's conclusion that the Radiological Control and ALARA programs were not seriously challenged by the operational events of the SALP period.
Although that might appear to be the case, in fact, the NRC's rating was based on an assessment of all aspects of your radiation protection program, only one of which was your effort to keep radiation dose ALARA.
While the ALARA planning and reviews for your refueling outage were conducted during the assessment period, the effectiveness of your efforts could not be determined until the refueling outage actually began.
A critical element in the assessment of a facility's radiation protection program is how well the facility handles the radiological control problems generally associated with significant operational events or an extended outage.
We do concur that your 1988 collective dose goal is 360 person-rem, not 260 person-rem as stated in the SALP report.
Enclosure 4 documents this change to the SALP report.
Emer enc Pre aredness:
The SALP report did imply that the sole cause of the EOF ventilation system malfunction during the 1988 exercise was due to inleakage through unvalved filtered drain lines.
We concur that the inspection report documenting this exercise identified the primary reason for the failure to obtain EOF pressurization to be inadequate control of the access doors.
Enclosure
expands on this change and corrects the SALP report.
88fi300o45 850OO+aO Bgi21 PDR ADO K pgU
Carolina Power and Light Company November 21, 1988 Also, the SALP report was determined,to be accurate in the discussion of the performance of dose assessment personnel.
As stated in NRC Inspection Report 400/87-30, personnel demonstrated familiarity with the applicable procedures; however, their overall performance was slow and considered minimally acceptable.
A commitment was made by your staff to evaluate this area for improvement, and the implementation of that corrective action was subsequently reviewed and found adequate.
One of the criteria for a SALP I rating in a functional area is that a high level of performance is being achieved.
Although the Harris program is satisfactory and management involvement evident, two licensee-identified violations and several areas for improvement were identified during the assessment period.
These areas for improvement showed that you are still striving for the level of performance that would be characterized as a
SALP Category 1.
Thus, after review of the information you presented, we still view this functional area as a Category 2 for the evaluated period.
Fire Protection:
Your fire protection ar ea performance during the assessment period was very sound and effective.
However, when compared to the previous assessment period, a noticeable performance decrease was observed.
In that we did not observe any obvious large programmatic problems or personnel errors, we believe that the primary reason for the decrease was performance satisfaction on your s'taff's part and a -belief that, since outstanding performance had been once achieved and recognized, continued di'ligence would not necessarily be required to maintain a high level of performance.
We also believe that the lower visibility of the fire protection program during this assessment period, as compared to startup testing, contributed to the decrease in performance.
Even with this decrease in performance, our letter transmitting the SALP report did state that fire protection performance was still considered quite high.
In conclusion, we are pleased that, after reviewing this SALP report, you recognize the need to continue to strive for improvement in areas that appear already to be functioning in an outstanding manner and also to use this appraisal to evaluate and work on those areas where improvements are necessary.
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 with the referenced enclosures, will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
No reply to this letter is required; however, shou1d you have any questions concerning these matters, I'illbe pleased to discuss them with you.
Sincerely, Original Signed by Malcolm L. Ernst Enclosures:
(See page 3)
Malcolm L. Ernst Acting Regional Administrator
Carolina Power and Light Company November 21, 1988 Enclosures:
1.
Meeting Summary 2.
Copy of NRC Presentation Slides 3.
CPSL Response to SALP 4.
Errata Sheets
~
~
c w/encls:
R. A. Watson, Vice President Harris Nuclear Project D. L. Tibbitts, Director of Regulatory Compliance M. S. Hinnant, Plant. General Manager State of North Carolina c w/encls:
RC Resident Inspector 14. Upchurch, Chairman, Triangle J Council of Governments DRS Technical Assistant Document Control Desk RII PFre ric n
11//g/88 Ver 1 1 i 11/)g/88 RI I RI eyes son DCollins
//6/88
//L /88 11//$ /88 RII II'Shohr 11/
/88
November 21, 1988 ENCLOSURE
MEETING SUMMARY A.
A meeting was held on September 27, 1988, at the Harris Energy and Environmenta'3 Center to discuss the SALP report for the Shearon Harris faci 1 ity.
B.
Licensee Attendees S.
H.
W.
E.
M. A.
L.
W.
R. A.
A. B.
B. J.
R.
B.
C.
S.
Smith, Jr., Chairman/President Graham, Jr.,
Vice Chairman McDuffie, Senior Vice President, Nuclear Generation Eury, Senior Vice President, Operations Support Watson, Vice President, Harris Nuclear Project Cutter, Vice President, Nuclear Engineering Furr, Vice President, Operations Training Starkey, Jr., Manager, Nuclear Safety and Environmental Services Hinnant, Plant General Manager C.
NRC Attendees J.
N.
C.
W.
P.
E.
W.
H.
M. C.
K. M.
Grace, Regional Administrator, Hehl, Deputy Director, Division of Reactor Projects (DRP)
Fredrickson, Chief, Project Section 1A,.DRP Bradford, Senior Resident Inspector, Harris, DRP Shannon, Resident Inspector - Harris, DRP Clark, Director, Region II Public Affairs Staff
ENCLOSURE 2 SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMEXY QF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE
JULY 1, 1987 thmugh JUNE 30, 1988 HARRIS UNIT
SEPTEMBER 27, 1988 NEW HILL,. NORTH CAROLINA
SALP. I'ROGRAA( OBJECTIVES 1. IDENTIFY TRENDS IN LICENSEE PERFORMANCE 2. PROVIDE A BASIS FOR ALLOCATION OF NRC RESOURCES 3.
IMPROVE NRC REGULATORY PROGRAM
REGION II OECANIZATION NXf&I'IFSAHIB ADMINISTRATOR 4. N. GRACE OEPUTY M. L ERNST PUBLIC AFFAIRS STAFF.
DIR.
K. CLARK STAK AND &PL STAFF Nt, g. 95Ãgi@I DI10N Op BELCTOB PMMECTS DIR.
L REYES DEPUTY C. HEHL ON.
A. QBSON XPUlY E UERSCHOFF DMSION OF RADIATION SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS DIR..
J.
STOHR DMSION OF RESOURCE MAHAGGIEHT AND AOMWISTRATION DIR.
R. UALEY
DIYISION OF REACTOR PROJECTS ORGANIZATION DlVlSION OF REACTOR PROJECTS DIR.
L REYES DEPUTY C. HEHL REACTOR PROJECTS BRANCH NO.
CHIEF 0. VERRELLI REACTOR PROJECTS 8RANCH NO. 2 CHIEF
. B. WILSON REACTOR PROJECTS BRANCH NO. 3 CHEF V.
PROJECTS SECTTOR HO. 1A CHIEF P. FREMCKSON PROJECTS SECTIOtt HO, 2A CHIEF =
J. CRLENJAK PROJECTS SECTHN HO. 3A CHIEF T. PEH3LES BRUNSWICK HARRIS - 0. MAXWELL ROBINSON CATAWBA McGUIRE OCONEE PROJECTS SECTlON HO.
1B CHIEF H. DANCE PROJECTS SECTION HO. 2B CHIEF F, CAMPBELL PROJECTS SECTION HO, 3B CHIEF M, SINKULE FARLEY GRAND GULF g>
K BUCKUY, PROJ. Q0L HNRS NV. OF OPERATIONAL EVENTS ASSESSMENT DIV. OF REACTOR PROJFCTS Ol/rV/V AND SPECIAL PROJECTS
.
01V. OF REACTN INSPECTION ND SAFEGUARDS DIY'F RADlATION PROTECTION AND eamatCY PREPNKDHESS DN. OF UCDSEE PERFORLLLHCE AHQ
@JAN: Y EVP~A~OH
PERFORMANCE ANAI.YSIS AREAS FOR OPERATING REACTORS 1. PLANT OPERATIONS 2. RADIOLOGICAL CONTROLS 3. MAINTENANCE
- . 4. SUNSLLANCE 5.
FIRE PROTECTION 6.
SECURITY 8.
OUTAGES 9.
QUALITY PROGRAMS 1Q.
LICENSING ACTIVITIES 11.
TRAINING 12.
ENGINEERING SUPPORT
REDUCED NRC ATTENTION MAY BE APPROPRIATE.
LICENSEE MANAGEMENT ATTENTION AND INVOLVEMENT ARE AGGRESSIVE AND ORIENTED TGWARD NUCLEAR SAFETY; LICENSEE RESOURCES ARE AMPLE AND EFFECTIVELY USED SUCH THAT A HIGH LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE WITH RESPECT TO OPERATIONAL SAFETY QR CONSTRUCTION IS BEING ACHIEVE NRC ATTENTION SHOULD BE MAINTAINEDAT NORMAL LEVELS. LICENSEE MANAGEMENT ATTENllON AND INVOLVEMENTARE EVIDENT AND ARE CONCERNED WITH NUCLEAR SAFETY; LICENSEE RESOURCES ARE ADEQUATE AND ARE REASONABLY EFFECTIVE SUCH THAT SATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE WITH RESPECT TO OPERATIONAL SAFETY OR CONSTRUCTION IS BEING ACHIEVED,
BOTH NRC AND LICENSEE ATTENTION SHOULD BE INCREASED.
UCENSEE MANAGEMENT ATTENTION OR INVOLVEMENT IS ACCEPTABLE AND CONSIDERS NUCLEAR SAFElY, BUT WEAKNESSSES ARE EVIDENT; UCENSEE RESOURCES APPEAR TO BE STRAINED OR NOT EFFECTIVELY USED, SUCH THAT A MINIMAI.LYSATISFACTORY PERFORMANCE WITH RESPECT TO OPERATIONAL SAFETY OR CONSTRUCTION IS BEING ACHIEVED,
1. MANAGEMENT INVOLVEMENT IN ASSURING QUAUTY 2. APPROACH TO RESOLUTION OF TECHNICAL ISSUES FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT 3. RESPONSIVENESS TO NRC INlllATIVES 4. ENFORCEMENT HISTORY 5. REPORTING AND ANALYSIS OF REPORTABLE EVENTS 6,
STAFFING (INCLUDING MANAGEMENT)
7, 'TRAINING EFFECTIVENESS AND QUALIFICATION
V OLAT ON SUMMARY JULY 1, )S87 fhrough JUNE 50, )988 I
II
- III IV
.
Y
HARRIS
0
0 REGION II AVE.
0
20
1
OPERATIONS PHASE VIOLATIONS/OPERATING REACTOR July 3, 1987 through June 30, 1988 LEGEND CPAL UTILITIES Ul
)5 hl lQ
> 10 z
GPC FPC FPL Rll AV VEP DUKE APC SCE CPL SERI UTII I+
ALLEGATIONS PER UTILITY SITE JULY t, )S87 through JUNE 50, )988 LEGEND CPL Rll AVE.
Z 10
0 I
FPL GPC Rll AVSERI CPL FPC VEP DUKE APC SCE UTILITY
AVERAGE NUMBER OF Rx TRIPS PER 1000 CRITICAL HOURS JUNE 1987 - JUNE i988
.54
.49
.52 N'
.42 Z
I-
0Q0 A N
Q.
K,>8
,f2
.06
. HARRIS WE 1987 AVE NATL 1987 AVE - g
TOTAL NUMBER OF AUTOMATIC REACTOR TRIPS JUNE 1987 JUNE 1988 4.0 X5 LL
. 0
~
XO
14 1.0 4.00 2.38 3.64 HARRlS
JULY 1, 1987 through JUNE 30,
'1988 LEGEND N7L A'ttE HARRIS PLANT TYPE K
g
0
K lQ
~ 20 z
26
t+
al IMP f/'tm HARRIS GE SE NAt'L AVE CE HN D! $'T Q~p~
I
S JULY ), )987 through JUNE 30,
$ 988 LEGEND
m D 20 z
PERSONNEL (other) = 4 PERSONNEL (test/cal)
= 7 PERSONNEL (maintenance)
= 5 PERSONNEL (operating) = 7 OTNER (
COMPONENT FAILURE = 10 DESIGN CONST, = 7 PERSONNEL total
= 23
PLANT PERSONNEL
LANT
'
S87 through gUNp ~<
~ERSON'3,6g o~SIGN/CONST-f6,3%
23e3g COMP. FA(LURE
HARRIS MRs (PcRsoxvzc)
JULY 1, )987 fhrough JUNE 30, 1988
~A j
TEST/CALIB.
30.4%
MAINTENANCE 21.7'P ERATIONS 30.4r'o OTHER
) 7.4Fo PERSONNEL
FUNCT ONAL AREA COMPAR SON FOR REG ON FAC L T ES CYCLE V LEGEND IICATEGORY
H CATEGORY 2 R CATEGORY 3
0
QAlNT EM PREP FlRE PROT RAD CON SURV FUNCTIONAL ARU
FUNCT ONAL AREA COMPARISON FOR REGON FACLTES CYCLE V LEGEND CATEGORY'
CATEGORY 2 CATEGORY 3 SEC OUTAGES QP UC TRNG ENGR SUP FUNCTIONPL AREA
>03l03HH00 3'QGflH WON 30NVIHVA:
o e
o o
o o
'o o
n o
ll Io ol
<
t o
s s
s s
Ng Kl (3 NQ hl ~
Uel U
K Z
OO RZ l
K K
Z U Ltl ozz~
r- <O.OI UEgO
<><+O Q.>~~
Mz I OZ Z g U'<
gN
0
N
O N
0
'0) ",,d l'TS 0,
3.0 ALLOCATION OF INSP ECTION RESOURCES FY-88 AVG SALP RATlNQ va VARIANCE FROM BUDQET FTE~
REGION II MID YEAR REVIEW (OCTOBER MARCH 1 988)
4.0 2.S Lml l
2.0 (3 1.6
~l QH Cl
.l 1.0 2.0 1.0 aa cn g C)
~ O-1.0
TP MCG
~
BRU CR CAT ROB HAT GG NA 5 ITL HAR SUM ST.LU SUR OCO FAR
- PLANT OPERATIONS - CATEGORY 2 ( IMPROVING)
INCREASED MANAGPENT INVOLVP&TEVIDENT SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION ¹ REACTOR TRIPS 17 DURING LAST 'PERIOD 6 DURING THIS PERIOD PROFESSIONAL CONTROL ROCN ENVIRONBlT I
OPERATOR RESPONSE TO ABNORMAL CONDITIONS NUISANCE/DISABLED ALARMS MINIMIZED REPORTABLE EVENTS GREATER THAN AVERAGE NUMBER SEVERAL CLASSIFIED AS SIGNIFICANT BY NRC'AJORITY CAUSED BY PERSONNEL ERROR IN'ROVBK4T NOTED SECOND HALF CQ8 IANCE NN3ER GF NON-CPFLIANCE NEEDS TO BE REDUCED MAJORITY CAUSED BY PERSONNEl ERROR/AININ. OVERSIGHT MAJORITY OCCURRED NEAR BEGINNING OF PERIOD CONDITION OF PLANT - EXCELLENT OVERALL PERFORMANCE - SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVED
RADIOLOGICAL CONTROLS - CATEGORY 2 POSITIVE NNAGEYENT PPHASIS ON ALARA CHENISTRY PROGRAN EFFECTIVENESS IYPROVED GOOD USE OF SITE AND CORPORATE RESOURCES GOOD AGREPBlT BEIWEEN NRC AND LICENSEE RESULTS HEALTH PHYSICS AND RADWASTE STAFFING APPROPRIATE STAFF EXPERIENCE GOOD AND 15'ROVING ADEQUATE NUNBER OF QUALIFIED TECHNICIANS PERSONNEL CONTAf'1INATIONS AVERAGE FOR SIZE AND AGE OF PLANT ALTHOUGH VOLIJK OF CONTNINATED RADIOACTIVE WASTE LESS THAN NATIONAL AVERAGEi NY NEED ATTENTION TOTAL CONTNINATH) AREA LESS THAN NATIONAL AVERAGE
NINTENANCE - CATEGORY 1 NINTENANCE CONTINUES TO BE A STRENGTH WORK REQUEST SYSTEN WORKING WELL PRIORITY AND SIGNIFICANCE OF JOB EFFECTIVELY GÃ%NICATED RESOURCES APPROPRIATELY APPLIED NINTENANCE FEEDBACK PROGRN CONTINUES TO IN'ROVE EXTENSIVE LIVE LOAD PACKING PROGRN INITIATED DEDICATED CREWS FOR NINTENANCE AND SURVEILLANCE OF REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTBS POST NINTENANCE TESTING PROGRN EFFECTIVELY I5'LENENTED OVERALL - CONPREHENSIVE AND AGGRESSIVE PROGRN
SURVEILLANCE - CATEGORY 1 DEKNSTRATED UNDERSTANDING OF SURVEILLANCE PROGRAN PROCEDURES TECHNICALLY ACCURATE AND NELL PLANNED I5'ROVED SURVEILLANCE TEST SCHEDULING PROGRN NNAGENENT INVOLVENENT AND CONTROL EVIDENT EROSION/CORROSION PROGRN ESTABLISHED IN RESPONSE TO INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE OVERALL EFFECTIVE, NELL NNAGED SURVEILLANCE PROGRN
FIRE PROTECTION - CATEGORY 2 IYPROVED RESPONSE TIK OF FIRE BRIGADE ATTRIBUTED TO NEM EQUIPMENT CARTS AND HOSE HOUSES INSPECTIONS AND TESTS GENERALLY PERFORMED SATISFACTORY HOUSEKEEPING AND CONTROLS OF CCN3USTIBLES SATISFACTORY ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING NET NRC GUIDELINES SCK PROBLENS IDENTIFIED INADEQUATE PROCEDURE TEST EXCEEDED SURVEILLANCE INTERVAL NNAGPBlT'NVOLVPENT AND CONTROL COULD BE ENHANCED OVERALL FIRE PROTECTION PROGRN ADEQUATELY INPLPKNTED
PERGENCY PREPAREDNESS - CATEGORY 2 EFFECTIVE PERGENCY NOTIFICATION AND KNUNICATION SYSTEN DPGNSTRATED ABILITYTO PNNPTLY IDENTIFY AND CLASSIFY EVENTS ON-CALL SYSTEN FOR AUPBITING ONSITE STAFF EFFECTIVE S(K PROBLENS IDENTIFIED TRAINING NEEDED FOR DOSE ASSESSMENT INPLPENTATION OF PERIODIC NINTENANCE PROGRN EOF VENTILATION SYSTEN POSITIVE PUBLIC INFORNTION PROGRAN SIGNIFICANTLY INPROVED SCENARIO FRN PERGENCY EXERCISE LICENSEE AUDIT PROGRN ADEQUATELY I%'LPENTED
SECURITY - CATEGORY 1 AGGRESSIVELY ATTACHED AND SOLVED POST LICENSING PROBLPS INCREASED NNAGPENT OVERSIGHT ENHANCED SECURITY EDUCATION
%LTI DISCIPLINE SECURITY TASK FORCE CREATED IN'LPENTED AGGRESSIVE ON-SHIFT TRAINING PROGRN SIGNIFICANTLY I5'ROVED C05'L IANCE RECORD
'VERY RESPONSIVE TO NRC CONCERNS CAUTION
OUTAGES - CATEGORY 1 INPl.EKNTED "OUTAGE NNAGPFN COORDINATION TEN REALISTIC/ATTAINABLE OUTAGE SCHEDULES ENSURED EFFECTIVE RESOURCE UTILIZATION PROPER QC COVERAGE GOOD UP-FRONT PLANNING ACTION TAKEN IN ADVANCE OF REGULATORY NNDATE INSPECTION OF RX TRIP BREAKERS PLAN TO INSPECT'CORE GUIDE TUBES ISI AM3 IST PROGRNS ADEQUATELY If'PLPENTED RESPONSIVE TO NRC INITIATIVES
QUALITY PROGRN - CATEGORY 2 DENNSTRATED I5'ROVPKNT IN VERIFYING QUALITY
'NHANCED REPORT AND CHECKLIST CONTENT INCREASED PERCENTAGE OF-PERFORNNCE/BASED INSPECTIONS REDUCED -NlNBER OF EXTENSIONS FOR CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ABILITYTO IDENTIFY AND CORRECT SAFEIY RELATED PROBLENS'ASK FORCE TO REDUCE TRIPS FRCN SECONDARY SYSTEN INTERACTION INVOLVENENT OF OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT IN PLANT STATUS INPROVED TRAINING IN NNY FUNCTIONAL AREAS INABILITYTO IDENTIFY AND CORRECT SAFETY RELATED PROBLENS CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TO PREVENT REPEAT OF BREACHING CONTAItST INTEGRITY UNTIDY ACTION TO 'CORRECT DEFICIENCIES IN REACTOR COOLANT VENT SYSTEN VALVES NON-CONSERVATIVE INTERPRETATION OF TS OVERALL PERFORNNCE
- DENNSTRATED AGGRESSIVE PROGRAM WITH SATISFACTQRY RESULTS
LICENSING ACTIVITIES
-.
CATEGORY 2 (IMPROVING)
GOOD MANAGEMENT CONTROL AND OVERVIEMi FREQUENT
%HINGSi VISITS AND DISCUSSION WITH NRC STAFF MANAGEMENT INVOLVEMENT DEKNSTRATED BY EFFORTS IN SEVERAL REGULATORY AREAS TECHNICAL ISSUE RESOLUTION THOROUGH AND ACCURATE LICENSING PERSONNEL SHGNED STRONG UNDERSTANDING OF ISSUES PROBLENS IN DEVELOFKNT OF "NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS" CONSIDERATION STEN GENERATOR BLMQNN LINE NON-CONSERVATIVE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION INTERPRETATION PROBLENS IDENTIFIED DURING CONSTRUCTION - OPERATION TRANSITION PERFORMANCE IMPROVED DURING LAST HALF OF SALP PERIOD
\\
TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION EFFECTIVENESS - CATEGORY 1 TRAINING ACTIVITIES ENONPASSEDi TO AN EXTENT'l L AREAS GENERAL ENPLOYEE TRAINING IN HEALTH PHYSICS WAS GOOD FIRE PROTECTION PERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND SECURITY TRAINING WERE EFFECTIVE HIGH PASS RATE FOR LICENSED OPERATORS EQ TRAINING WEAKNESSES ARE BEING ADDRESSED
ENGINEERING SUPPORT - CATEGORY 2 (I5'ROVING)
CONSOLIDATION OF ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP AT CORPORATE
.
REDUCE ON CONTRACTORS NINTAIN CORPORATE KMNLEDGE ON DESIGN ISSUES
.
DEDICATED SITE E%INEERING SUPPORT GROUP ACCEPTABLE EQ PROGRN QA EFFECTIVENESS CONTROL OF DESIGN CHANGE PROGRN PRN'T RESPONSE TO IEB 85-03 OVERALL PERFORNNCE
- RESPONSIVE TO OPERATIONAL PROBLENS
OVERALL FACILITY EVAI UATION SHEARON HARRIS HAS BEEN OPERATED -IN AN OVERALL SAFE AND EFFECTIVE NNNER DURING THE FIRST YEAR OF FULL POWER OPERATION NJOR STRENGTHS WERE IDENTIFIED IN THE AREAS OF NINTENANCE SURVEILCANCEi AND OUTAGESi WITH. INCREASED CATEGORY RATINGS BEING ACHIEVED IN THE SECURITY AND TRAINING AREAS
'
THERE WERE NO NJOR WEAOESSES IDENTIFIED IN ANY OF THE FUNCTIONAL AREA, HCM VERi FIRE PROTECTION AND LICENSING AREAS DID DECREASE IN THEIR CATEGORY RATINGS ALTHOUGH NON-CONSERVATION NNAGENENT DECISIONS AND NLKROUS OPERATOR ERRORS OCCURRED DURING THE FIRST HALF OF THE ASSESPKNT PERIOD.
CONTINUED OPERATION AT POWER WITH CORRECTIVE ACTION FEEDBACK HAS REDUCED THIS EXPERIENCE-RELATED TREND DRNATICALLY HARRIS HAS DEVELOPED AN ADEQUATE HEAI TH PHYSICS PROGRN, AT THE END OF THE SALP PERIODS THE STAFF AND NNAGPENT HAD NOT BEEN CHALLENGED ON THE PROGRN INPLPBlTATION BY AN EXTENDED OUTAGE OR A SIGNIFICANT HEALTH PHYSICS RELATED N3DIFICATION OR 'EVENT NINTENANCE CONTINUES TO BE A STRONG AREA AT HARRIS, WITH AN AGGRESSIVE NINTENANCE EFFORT THE SURVEILLANCE PROGRN IS WELL ESTABLISHED AND HAS PROVEN TO BE VERY EFFECTIVE THE FIRE PROTECTION AREA, AN INCREASE IN THE NU%ER OF VIOLATIONS REVEALED AN APPARENT C05'LACENCY AFTER THE ESTABLISM"KNT OF AN EXCELLENT FIRE PROTECTION PROGRN.
INCREASED NNAGENENT ATTENTION IS NEEDED TO REESTABL ISH THE PREVIOUS HIGH PERFORNNCE LEVEL YiWAGB'ENT OF ThE EYERGBCY PREPAREDNESS ACTIVITY hfS S"'TISFACTORY, BUT IYPROYHKNT WAS hEEDED IN ACCIDENT DOSE PROJECTIONS HARRIS HAS AGGRESSIVELY RESOLVED THOSE SECURITY PRGBLBiS MICH OCCURRED SHORTLY AFTER PLANT LICENSING PLANT OUTAGE PERSONNEL HAVE DEKiNSTRATED CITED OUTAGE FLil'"'ING CCCRDIN'TIQi AND IYt LPB)TATICN
THE QUALITY ASSURANCE ATTITUDE AND I5'LPENTATION AT HARRIS IS QUITE GOOD, NORNLLYi ACTIVITIES ARE ACC(KLISHED RIGHT THE FIRST TI%,
FEEDBACK ON
'ROBLEN AREAS GENERALLY RESULTS IN IMPROVED PERFORNNCE, I
PERFORNNCE IN THE LICENSING AREA, WHILE STILL CONSIDERED GOODi DECLINED EARLY DURING THE SALP PERIOD FRN THE PREVIOUS CATEGORY 1 RATING.
THIS DECLINE IS ATTRIBUTED. IN PART TO THE TRANSITION FRN CONSTRUCTION TYPE LICENSING ACTIVITIES,TO OPERATING ACTIVITIES, PERFORNNCE IN THE LATTER PART OF THE SALP PERIOD INDICATES THAT THESE TRANSITIONAL PROBLENS APPEAR TO BE RESOLVED TRAINING WAS OBSERVED TO BE EFFECTIVE IN ALL FUNCTIONAL AREAS ENGINEERING SUPPORT HAS BEEN VERY ACTIVE AND IS STILL IN TRANSITION
SALP PROGRAM REV SONS
MAJOR CHANGES TO THE SALP PROGRAM CONSISTS OF...
Redefinition of Functional Areas Reduction in Number of Separate Functional Areas Two New Functional Areas
- Eng/Tech Support
- Safety Assess/Qual Verification Attributes Addressing Human Perf.
0 Self-Assessment Emphasis on Analysis
OPERATlNG REACTORS Plant Operations Radiological Controls Maintenance.
Surveillances Emergency Preparedness Security Engineering/Technical Support Safety Assessment/Quality Verification Other
~
~
I'UNCT ONAL AREAS
~~,
~ '
w+', ~'AIt
~
'oils and Foundations Containment, Safety-Related Structures, and Ma)or Steel Supports Piping Systems and S0pports Safety-Related Components
- Mechanlcet Auxiliary Systems Electrical Equipment and Cables Instrumentatlon Engineering/Technical Support Safety Assessment/Quality Verification Other
I ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SUPPORT
~t
)0 The purpose of this functional area is to address the adequacy of technical
.
and engineering support for all plant activities.
lt includes all Licensee ActiVities associated with the
~desi n
of lant modifications; engineering and
~
'I technical su ort for o erations, outages, rnatntenance, testing, surveillance; and rocurement activities; training; and configuration mano ement (including maintaining design bases and safety margins).
'
SAFETY ASSESSMENT/QUALITY VERIFICATION The purpose of this functional area is to address the technical adequacy and completeness of the Scensee's appaach toward a vanety of activities oesociated, with the implementation of licensee safety policies and licensee activities related to amendment requests, exempbon requests, relief requests, response to generic letters, bulletins, and information notices, and resolution of TMl items and other regulatory initiatives.
lt also includes
.
licensee activities related to the resolution of safe issues, 10 CFR 50.59 reviews, 10 CFR 21 asses'smerits; safety committee and self-assessment activities, analysis of industry's operationai experience, root cause onolyses of plant events, use of feedback from plant quality assurance/
quality control(QA/QC) reviews, and participation in self-improvement programs.
It includes the effectiveness of the licensee's quality verification function in identifying substandard or anomalous performance in monitoring the overall performance of the plan ~
~
r" i ~
~ +Q Qo iW,
~
~ i
~
gO
- o> ~'iPtq Og +, oy
~ ~
~
PERFORMANCE RATING -CATEGGRIES Expanded discUssion intent Redefinition of the categories to clarify their meaning
AREA PERFORMANCE CATEGORY f Licensee manogement attention and involvement are readily evident and place emphasis on superior performance of nuclear safety or safeguards activit'es, with the resulting performance substantially exceedbg regulatory requirements.
Licensee resources are ample and effectively used so that a high level of plant and personnel performance is being achieved.
Reduced NRC attentioa may be appropriat AREA.PEREORMANCE CATEGORY 2 Ucensee management attention to and involvement in the performance of nuclear safety or safeguards activities are good.
The licensee has attained a
level of performance above that needed to meet regulatory requirements.
Licensee resources are adequate and reasonably allocated so that good Pont and personnel performonce is being achieved.
NRC attentiorr may be maintoined at normol level ~
C
'I +sf lj ~,
op AREA PERFORMANCE CATEGORY 5 Licensee management attention to and involvement in the performance of nuclear safety or safeguards activities are not sufficient.
The licensee's performance does not significantly exceed that needed to meet minimal regulatory requirements.
Ucensee resources appear to be strained or not effectively used.
NRC attention should be increased above normal levels.
'