Text

Forwards SALP Repts 50-313/89-34 & 50-368/89-34 for Jul 1988 to Sept 1989.Lists Specific Areas Resulting from Assessment That Merit Highlighting
	ML19332E622
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear
Issue date:	11/28/1989
From:	Martin R; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:	Campbell G; ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT CO.
Shared Package
ML19332E623	List: IR 05000313/1989034; ML19332E622;
References
	NUDOCS 8912080099
	Download: ML19332E622 (4)
	v • d • e

._

.

..

-.

.

...

--- -

--

- - - .

-

--

Kg

i

,

W 2 8 919

l

.

<,

1

'

' ;,-

In Reply Refer To:

,

Dockets: , 50-313/89-34

i

,"

50-368/89-34

~

j

l

1

,

Arkansas Power & Light Compary

'

ATTN: Gene Campbell.-Vice Pmsident

l'

Nuclear Operations

l

.P.O. Box 551

_

72203

-

Little Rock, Arkansas

.

Gentlemen:

'This letter fomaros the report of the Sistematic Assessment of Licensee

,

Perfomance (SALP) for Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO), Units 1 and 2.

The SALP

t

' Board met on November 2,1989, to evaluate- ANO performance for the period of

6

,

resulting evaluations are documented in the encferformance anal ses andosedinitialSAl

July 1~, 1988, through September 30, 1989. The

.

In.acebrdance with NRC policy, I have reviewed the SALP Board assessment and

, concur with their ratings.- During this SALP period, the perfomance of ANO

received significant NRC attention and review, including a major diagnostic

!

evaluation team review during August and _ September of 1989. While the report

l

= of that review:is yet to be issued, you were briefed on the results at your

l

Little Rock office on October 18, 1989. Our assessment concluded that your.

t

perfomance warranted lower ratings in four of seven functional areas during

!

i

this SALP' period compared to ratings assigned in the previous SALP period.

It _

is my view that this is partially attributable to a change in our. understanding

,

of your perfomance, primarily as a result of several major operational events

!

and problems during late-1988 and early 1989. This revealed significant

'

weaknesses in management involvement with plant activities, including

>

o:

' cormctive action and other major programs. These weaknesses were previously

'

identified to you and my staff has noted some positive results from the recent

organizational and personnel realignments, perticulerly regarding your staffs'

!

i'

responsiveness and ability to react to significant issues.

However, it is my

j

view that further improvements in your ability to aggressively self-identify

.

and correct program weaknesses is critical to the achievement of long-term.

1

'

improvement in overall perfomance.

I believe thattsuch improvements are

uncertain without a significant assessment of'your program adequacies,

priorities, and resource allocations. Such an assessment of your present.

>

4

initiatives should be. integrated with other ongoing actions resulting from-

pmvious NRC inspection and evaluation activities.

.l

'l

g

LThe:following specific areas resulting from our assessnent merit highlighting:

,

M?.

The rating;in the functional area of Emer ency Preparedness continued the

i

1

]jo

well established program, management support, and dedicated ANO staff

Category 1 perfomance from the previous ALP period. This indicates a

'

perfomance in this area.

w

RSS g M

Rh

C:

P/A

N

R

RIV:DRP/

w

ATHowell:df? ;RHaag

CCWarren DDChamberlain CPoslusny FJHibdon ABBeach

"

35

11/p/89_

11/21/89 11/2 ? 89. 11/27/89

11/21/89 11/A7/89 11/27/89

[ NR

E

D:DR

DD:DRP

M

RA

Reconcur[Tain

fC

is

CCHakk:

lan.

-TPGwynn

JC

in

~ RD

in DDChamber

LJCagl/89

11/2)/89

')

1

11/

89 11/n/89

'

11/j1/89

11/')

..

.

..

.

.-.

--

. . - - .

i

..

.

'

o.

i

.,

- Arkansas Power & Light Company

-2-

1

2.

The rating in the functional. area of security remained at Category 2

as in the previous SALP period.

It is impor3at to note that significant

resources have been expended at ANO to support the ongoing implenentation

of several security system upgrades. Continuation of management involvenent

1

in and dedication to performance improvement progrems in the security area

i

is encouraged to bring current ongoing initiatives to conclusion.

3.

The functional area of engineering / technical support received a Category 2

rating. While this is the sane rating as the previous SALP period,

,

weaknesses continue, including delays in im)lementing several long-tenn

)

improvement programs and the increasing backlog of engineering workload,

i

We recognize that these weaknesses have been exacerbated in the short-tem

)

by your. initiatives in the cortvetive actions area, which resulted in the

'

shifting of engineering resources to identify and implement corrective

actions for plant problems. However, problems with engineering support to

,

operations and maintenance continue, along with delays in implementing the

' , ~

system engineer progra'n. Strengths in the design control process and the

engineering staff ability to identify and resolve complex, longstanding

significant design issues at ANO have provided some balance to overall

j

perfonnance in this area.

,

4 .'

The rating in the functional area of radiological controls was reduced to

l

' Category 2 from a Category 1 in the previous SALP period. This reduced

perfonnance rating reflects the results of increased activities affecting

~:

the radiation protection organization from extended outages during this

SALP period. The new management team initiative to highlight ALARA

awareness is viewed as a positive step in this area.

.

5.-

The reduction to a Category 2 rating in plant operations and to Category 3

ratings.in both maintenance / surveillance and safety assessment / quality

verificatien reflect the conrnon themes of lack of effective managenent

involvement, weak interdepartmental interfaces, untinely and incomplete

corrective actions, excessive backlogs, and weak licensee self-assessment

capabilities. The new organizational realignment has shown some positive

results but, as noted previously, long-term improvement is uncertain

'

without significant reassessment of priorities and resource allocations.

A management meeting is scheduled with you and your' staff at the ANO. facility on

December 19,1989,: to review the results of this initial SALP report. Within

"

30 days.of this management meeting, you are required to provide a written

'

response to the areas rated as Category 3, providing your planned corrective

actions to achieve improved performance. You may also provide written conenents

on any of the other SALP areas. Your comments, a summary of our meeting, and

my disposition of your consnents will be issued as an appendix to the enclosed

initial-SALP report and will constitute the final SALP report.

,

f

. -i---.- -

.---------.'

.. , ---

, - . . . , _ .

-,~--,n.-

,

.n..,

- , - - - . - - . - ,

_.,

, ,

I

]

'

e

,.

,

~

i

c

' e .1

i

,f "

Arkansas Power & Light Company.

-3-

l

-

a

,

Coments whihh you submit are not subject to the procedures of the Office of

j

'

Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,

l

PL'96-511..

'

-

1

Sincerely,

i

,

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY

'

SOBEM 0,MARTill

j

t.

. Robert D. Martin

Regional Administrator

'

>

'

' Enclosure:

<

' Initial SALP Report 50-313/89-34

50-368/89-34'

,,

I

cc w/ enclosure:

Arkansas Nuclear One

'

,

'

ATTN:

Early Ewing General Manager

Technical Support and Assessment

P.O. Box 608:

!

Russellville, Arkansas 72801

,

Arkansas Nuclear One,

. ATTN:

Neil Carns.5 Director

.

1

Nuclear ' Operations

P.O.-Box 608

.

l

Russellville Arkansas 72801

-

,

Combustion Engineering, Inc.

!

' ATTN: Charles B. Brinkman, Manager

Washington Nuclear Operations -

l

'

l

-12300 Twinbrook Parkway, Suite 330

Rockville, Maryland 20852

,

Honorable Joe W. Phillips

i

County Judge of Pope County

,

'

.

Pope County Courthouse'

,

Russellville, Arkansas 72801

l

l-

Bishop Cook, Purcell & Reynolds

l

T

ATTN:' Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq.

1400 L Street, N.W.

.

Washington, D.C..

20005-3502

.

)

(

,

a ~ .

-m

-. .

.a

.~n....., . ..-~,. . - - -

. ., ____ ., _-.

., . -._..

7m .

z -

-

.

,

'

,

r

..;

>

,

.

'

J

,

i s- '

'

$s

5-

,

. Arkansas Power & Light Company

-4-

t;

f:

'

+

.

Arkansas Department of Health

ATTN: Ms. Greta Dicus,, Director

-

Division of Environmental Health

,

~ Protection.

4815 West Markem Street .

,

.g,

4<

Little Rock, Arkansas '72201

Babcock & Wilcox

Nuclear Power Generation Division

,

ATTN:' Mr. Robert B. Borcum

s

,

1700.flockv111e Pike, Suite.525

.

-

. Rockville, Moryland 20852

,

.bcctoDMB(IE40)'-

~

L

-bec distrib. by RIV:

'*R. D.: Martin-

Resident' Inspector-

'

l,

DRSS-FRPS-

SectionChief(DRP/A)

.

'

/-

.Lisa Shea. RM/ALF

RIV File

'

DR3 .

MIS System

-!

.. RSTS Operator

ProjectEngineer(DRP/A)

l

'r

D

. *C. Harbuck NRR Project Manager (MS: _13-D-18)

'*C.. Poslusny, NRR Project Manager (MS: ,.13-D-18)

1

Chainnan Carr (MS: - 17-D-1)>

Records Center.-INPO

!!'

Commissioner Roberts (MS: 18-H-1)

RRIs at all sites

'

.

4

Commissioner Rogers (MS:i 16-H-3)

G. F; Sanborn, E0

I'

Commissioner Curtiss (MS: 16-G-15)

DRP(2)

-J. T. Gilliland, PA0

'

'j

' J. M. Taylor A/EDO (MS:

17-G-21)

A. B. Beach, D/DRSS

1

.

,

.

w/766..

'

,

'

.B

'

E

'

l'

,

\\

,

I

s

,;

L

l

p

i

+

_,

I

$

-,

, "

'

.

..

.

.-

.

ML19332E622

Text

Navigation menu

Search