ML17199P914
| ML17199P914 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 06/18/1987 |
| From: | Davis A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Reed C COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17199P966 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8706240238 | |
| Download: ML17199P914 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000237/1987001
Text
..
Docket No. 50-237
Docket No. 50-249
Corrmonwealth Edison Company
ATTN:
Mr. Cordell Reed
Vice President
Post Office Box 767
Chicago, IL
60690
Gentlemen:
JUN 1 *a 1987
This refers to the NRC's Systematic Assessment of Licensee Perfonnance (SALP)
6 Board Report for the Dresden ,Nuclear Plant, our meeting of April 13, 1987,
which discussed in detail the contents of the report, and your written
comments dated May 13, 1987, relative to this report.
The staff has reviewed your corrective action programs in response to the two
Category 3 ratings in the areas of Fire Protection/Housekeeping and Quality
Programs and Administrative Controls Affecting Quality and the declining
trend in the area of Plant Operations.
We plan to monitor the results of your
actions in these areas.
The staff has already observed some improvement in
performance as a result of comprehensive ~orrective action programs on your
part.
We view these changes as positive steps and hope they will result in
long tenn perfonnance improvements for the Dresden facility.
In your response to the SALP 6 Boar.d Report, you were concerned about
reference to events which occurred after the SALP 6 rating period. This is
- a conmon practice used by Region lU SALP Boards to aid in detennining the
direction of -licensee performance at the end of the SALP period.
When
preparing a SALP report, the preparer routinely reviews the previous SALP
report, so the SALP 7 report should take into consideration the mention of
these events in the SALP 6 report.
Your response also stated that you believe the results of the Safety System
Outage Modification Inspection {SSOMI) should not have been addressed in both
the Outage area and the Quality Programs and Administrative Controls Affecting
Quality area, but, rather, in one area alone.
We disagree with this because
we believe that the results of the SSOMI identified weaknesses in both of
these areas and therefore should have been addressed in both of these areas.
- a10624o238--87o6ia-*----.. --~.
ADOCK 05000237
G
. PDR
A
,_..
Conmonwealth Edison Company
2
JUN 1 *s 1987
We recognize the improvements you have made in the area of surveillances.
The
SALP Board had a split vote for the surveillance area, with half of the votes
being Category 1 and half the votes being Category 2.
However, I decided on
the Category 2 rating because I did not believe your performance had reached
the Category 1 level.
An improving trend was not indicated because a trend
is defined to be a noteable change in performance near the close of the
assessment period.
The Board did not observe this type of trend, but, rather,
steady performance over the entire SALP period.
Bas.ed on the formal exchange of information between our respective staffs,
and in the absence of verbal identification of discrepancies within the
report or formal written convnents from you requiring resolution, only three
typographical changes to the SALP Board Report are necessary as indicated
on the enclosed errata sheet. Please remove the old pages and insert the
corrected pages into your report.
Enclosed, as an Appendix to the SALP Board Report, is a sunmary of our meeting
which includes names of those persons in attendance.
Issuance of the Appendix
serves as the final step in our SALP assessment process.
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 attachments will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
No reply to this letter is required; however, should you have questions on the
conclusions reached by NRC, or on the Appendix to the SALP Report, please let
us know and we will .be pleased to discuss them *with you.
/
Enclosure: Appendix to
SALP 6 Board Reports
No. 50-237/87001;
No. 50-249/87001
See Attached Distribution
R
RJJJ
- RIII
~A (JJ?;-
JJP
Ring ~For~rp
.
'1¥7
. . t~ jJ7'--
Sincerely,
A. Bert Davis
Regional Administrator
R~f:>-
.
RIII,otJ?
f1 Cliri(SOtimos utiap;rlfi 10
~, n,}d 1 .
6 171.P/
&
Conmonwealth Edison Company
Distribution
cc w/enclosure:
D. L. Farrar, Director
of Nuclear Licensing
J. Eenigenburg, Plant Manager
DCS/RSB (RIDS)
Licensing Fee Management Branch
Resident Inspector, RIII *
Richard Hubbard
J. W. Mccaffrey, Chief, Public
Utilities Division
T. E. Murley, Director, NRR
Regional Administrators
RI, RII, RIV, RV
L. W. Zech, Chairman
J. K. Asselstine, Co11111issioner
F. M. Bernthal, Commissioner
T. M. Roberts, Commissioner
K. M. Carr, Commissioner
M. Grotenhuis, NRR Project Manager
D. Muller, NRR Project Director
3 JUN 18 1987
J. Lieberman, Director, Office of Enforcement
D. E. Hickman, SALP Coordinator, NRR
RII I PRR
Riii SGA
State Liaison Officer, State of IL