ML19332F232

Partially Deleted Memorandum Providing Commission W/Summary of Discussions During NRC 890517-18 Mgt Meeting & W/Ltrs to Be Sent to Licensees of Plants That Will Be Discussed at 890601 Commission Meeting.Encls Also Partially Withheld

ML19332F232
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse, Palo Verde, Harris, Arkansas Nuclear, Brunswick, Robinson, 05000000
Issue date:	05/24/1989
From:	Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:	Carr, Roberts, Zech NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML19332B552	List: ML19332B551 ML19332F219 ML19332F224 ML19332F232 ML20042D190
References
FOIA-89-306 NUDOCS 8912140097
Download: ML19332F232 (10)

Text

N j.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION p~

. QASHINGT ON, D. C. 20658

]ht....

ox MAY t 41989 e

MEMORANDUH:

Chairman Zech Comissioner Roberts Comissioner Carr Comissioner Rogers Comissioner Curtiss L

fROM:

Victor Stello, Jr.

Executive Director for Operations I'

SUBJECT:

RESULTS OF NRC MANAGEMENT MEETING HELD MAY 17-18,1989 The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the Comission with a sumary of discussions held at the May 17-18,1969 NRC Management Meeting, and to

>rovide the Comission copies of letters to be sent to the licensees of plants t1at

~

will be discussed at the June 1,1989, Comission meeting.

As the Comission is aware, NRC senior ranagers meet approximately biannually to review the perforrance of operating nuclear power plants licensed by the l

NRC. These meetings are conducted to assure NRC is focusing its resources on r

plants and related issues of greatest safety significance.

Euclear power plant performance was a major topic of discussion at this latest NRC Management Meeting.. A sumary of the results of this discussion is presented in enclosure 1.

Ma sumary of the closed are cop ers to e r.a

censees, 17-18, 1989, NRC Management Meeting, and a list of attendees at that meeting.

Information in this record was delcted in accordance with the freadem of Information Act, exemptions #

s F0IA-29-3o 4 0

8912140097 891205 7

PDR FOIA AMORUSDB9-306 PDR

.z.2:--

't.

~.,

The~ Commission Please note that the information contained with this memorandum is sensitive end will be discussed at the June 1 1989 Comission meeting. Following the meeting,theletterstolicenseeswIllbeplacedinthePublicDocumentroom.-

OriginrJ s'gned by

\\'!:: tor Stello, Jr. -

Victor Stello, Jr.

Executive Director for Operations

Enclosures:

1.

Summary of Senior Management Meeting Results 2.

Letters to Licensees

3. -

Management Meeting Sumary 4.

List of Attendees cc w/ enclosures:

SECY OGC i

l l

Distribution:

VStello

.JTaylor HThompson JBlaha TMartin BClayton EDO r/f i

l l

l DEDRO DEDR0 C DEDS OED BClay on kMart'n Jf '

r

[ello,Jr.

5/2f/89 5/ 2M/89 5/

/89 50 89

O ENCLOSURE 1 Semary of Senior Management Meeting Results i

Meeting Dates Category 3 Category 2 Category 1 r_, y

.e -

+. -

" ' ~ ; '.;7), -

.y-( ; ;; <u - - :.;.

..; c

..?.-

n

.-[

t 3

f.

e 5

5 s

f 4

e.

7,

a 1

.]O:4;;

wl.

sy g

~

~

z..:

' r

. sy *;

~

y 2.,1,;-

y~

J.*.-

+

p..,

y y

r h

.?

.1' s f Jg ~

4,

%Q

. M.$1

.y..

,y*

+

. l. 0-

.(..g:f p [Qig. y

[

s

.j

$ M1 g a.c. ~ ;. -

{

n J._s.,1 7;

;..c

,,yg

_ y,.,

q.

q...., p.

~..x y

9 Category 1 l

Plants in this category have taken effective action to correct identified No further problems and to implement programs for improved performance.

NRC special attention is necessary beyond the regional office's current level of monitoring to ensure improvement continues.

l Category 2 Plants in this category have been identified as having weaknesses that warrant increased NRC attention from both headquarters and the regional office. A plant will remain in this category until the licensee demonstrates a period of improved performance.

l Category 3 Plants in this category have been identified as having significant weaknesses that warrant maintaining the plant in a shutdown condition t

until the licensee can demonstrate to the NRC that adequate programs have both been established and implemented to ensure substantial,improveent.

l

~

j 7,

i' A

4 ^'

ENCLOSURE 2 I

< y.

t Letters'to Licensees-I i N P

' ~8 88/

d

)

y O

1 e

s 9

D

\\

' e:

\\

\\

+

e

-,ne.-

~,_

ENCLOSURE 3 NRC MANAGEMENT MEETING SUlEARY May 17-18, 1989 Region III 4

Focus On Licensee Performance Following the June 1985 loss of feedwater event at Dsvis-Besse, one resulting NRC action was that senior NRC managers periodically meet to discuss the plants of greatest concern to the agency and to plan a coordinated course of action. This was the seventh such meeting. The last meeting was held in Region IV in December 1988. The meeting in Region III was structured to review the status of the plants discussed at the last meeting and to review the perfor-mance of other plants to determine if any changes should be made to the list of l

problem facilities.

In preparation for the meeting, NRR, in conjunction with the five regional offices,AE0D,andRES,preparedbackprounddocumentsontheplantstobe

~

discussed. Inputs for each plant inc uded a summary of the most recent SALP and SALP history, a discussion of current operating experience, current NRC and licensae activities, and performance indicator data. Data pertaining to safety significant hardware issues at the plants was also provided. This information was distributed to meeting attendees prior to the meeting.

It provided the basis for review and discussion of each plant's performance and for senior management identification of those plants warranting increased NRC attention.

In reviewing the plants that have experienced significant performance problems, the NRC managers have set the following levels or categories of performance based upon plant actions to date to correct the problems and to achieve improved operations.

2.

Plants removed from the list of problem facilities.

Plants in this category have taken effective action to correct identiffed problems and to implement programs for improved performance. No further NRC special attention is necessary beyond the regional office's current level of senitoring to ensure improvement continues.

2.

Plants authorized to operate that the NRC will monitor closely.

Plants in this category have been identified as having weaknesses that warrant increased NRC attention from both headquarters and the regional office. A plant will remain in this category until the licensee denenstrates a period of improved performance.

Y,.t

~,h y

, y,:,n+

d _ h' g,34 49'*

3.

Shutdown plants requiring NRC authorization to operate and which the NRC p

will monitor closely.

Plants in this category have been identified es having significant l

c weaknesses that warrant maintaining the plant in a shutdown condition until the licensee can demonstrate to the NRC that adequate programs have both been established and implemented to ensure substantial improvement.

l o

The Following Chart Lists Conclusions from this Meeting and from the Previous H

i n

Meeting i

l7 l

L.-

Meeting Dates Category 3 Category 2 Category 1

., - -- i s

s

..c

.c

)

i h

l'

.y :. NV., L.

'l w

y v,,

'. s-'

u, 3.,

,g 1

..,,t.+

s e

4

%yhM #'kk@;....<..d;;

, " % ". Q ':

[j

'n-y V. )..

i r s.

+

Q.'q f

3jf.

_+

e.

g.'+

4v

..;n.,

. g i; m

}.N [ ir.q}7 y y*

. y& g bg[$ '.

.p. [ ': j.: [ % ;i -

[ ^. : :. ~ >

1; i; A ~, f 3r g d y # (e.. <

7 f.. '

- 'N c;;

g..

- 'y' W

w\\

w y x..

g;

., n ' e 3.1 a

l-

e. 4 4.a 1 b. w < a o

4' k

d[.,$,[i e t.4;g-

. a "..,

jc 2

t

.g

~. y y ?.-

m

~.

f'

• ', * '7., ' t je.Q 9 3.g it[

y x

f. ), f $,

r-

,M'$.:.yf bDe.].

... t c g,.g.

3,,7,g4.. - -

-- ]

J n:

't,

..;... :g.

a :.. +

j NRC senior management plans to review the status of the all reactors on an Determinations will then be made to add or approximate 6-month frequency.

delete ifcensees from this list based on demonstrated performance. This program represents a concerted effort by the NRC senior management to focus NRC resources on those plants and issues of greatest safety significance and risk.

L Specific Discussion of Problem Facilities lt F

Plants that have been Removed from the List of Problem Facilities (y* 9,.. gg. gy.q)g7y, y 7. w 3

.,y;;,.y.:

- mg v., y ;

. ~

u.

y b

~

'l -

g..

y

,' ~

1

,.+

2 s.

e

,r C4 W

>,, % 7 *.;~', S. ].

y -

g L

"{pl L:;

• q ; ; + *. ";.

t

?..; n :

' C ;n%%g,, *

.+

?+:.

c'

f

+;,,

[ 1 9,,9[ ~,.

n.

y-y Q;r y

v.;, ^

• \\

(.

z 4-

. +,,,.

.. f-

.. n,.u.~

T

~

4* 1

' se "

r 4

L 4, Q

.ls < } *.s.3

. a.. n P

~ '?,7 Y.,.

...j. l _ ~. N.

N

l.l.l { 7

,q z

r

..h hhh '.

,i

- A ; a k.(

..V

\\4 IM

$d+ a) n ). y.$h k y '.3;,.+ ws.~ a.o r.,,

-. ~ -

-~*

4 l

t..

==.

,y a

g (9:

M; u...

. g..y q

y, q

" p, i,

% }i; v

.., 0

~

_...~*

- 3,3

'f*

~

~

• l~f,.:.

4, bc phg ,

. - ~

• O.

[

. J.

' 9 's y 7. g -}.

.,x w

p ;

. %,,., 7

_n c

. W u ^

v s

'4

. n 4

'.* I ^

.)

b g

4q.

n.-

g'

~.

g g

2 a

m._,

T

(

p

, q. -;,

~

4

~. g.

.v 4

.g

~

e t

s 1:

N

+

a z g y

g-ll.,;

iY l

'_ /f

~

f'

, ^_k; i

~

[~

p

. y c J,4

^;

s.

4 r'

,Q

.., ~

s p

4 4

.,g f

~,

.

• A..' :(

~

'.n

_ * * ?

?"

~.

)

ll,_.;

' k y"

.m

~_

,s

(,,

4 E:

U j,

, g

?{

lf 3

-; A

• ^ '-

i

~

g x

4 g

e<

~

y

.c

=

.w,

. ' R,f.

%, &gs: ?? e.

a t

l

• • ?

y 44's jg 4

'(

m.

- 4g e

Q-

- a y

.t.

a.,

i

~ '

[; ; k.

}

o

,. +

+

+ :

_n j.

, t of,. L

, tg lk

~

~

~

1'

~

=

,,s w.,, 0;

..,y u,..

Brunswick 1 and 2 It Brunswick was a discussion plant at the June and December 1988 SMMs.

was selected because of riny instances of noncompliance, equipment failbres, and safety system actuations and because the plant best represents a variety H.D. Robinson, and Shearon Harris). Key af concerns about CP&L (Brunswick among the concerns which ha',e evolved are inadequate root cause analysis, weak 7

engineering / technical and maintenance support, lack of aggressiveness in identifying and/or following up problems, and poor comunications between In sumary, CP&L management's various leveh of management ar.d staff.

approach to operations resulted in their being in a reactive mode which raised a question about CP&L's mansgement capabilities.

l x.-

- - - ~ ~ - --- -

7

~;

L 7; i

3 pW CP&L had a third party 12 dependent (CRESAP) assessment perforined of their cor> orate functions and the BrucSwick plant operations. The CRESAP assessment, ion ofalthoug)

"y.

copununicat identified concerns with goal st:tting, being extended to generally positive, d unagement. This CRESAP analysis is and fra nte seals,binson p. ant and may be extended to the Harris plant. Recent personnel the Ro changes have been made at senior levels at CP8L fr.cluding the Executive VP and Senior VP and site management changes have been implemented.

It was concluded that overall performance is improving, but engineering and QA AnNicdiagnosticevaluationteam(DET)inspec-continue as major weak areas.

tion was recently completed at Brunswick that confinned problems in a variety cf areas including root cause analysis, engineering configuration control, and employee relations. Concern w essed about 1 mited ns on j

>v suas between CP&L plants

[v s y n. g 1

,4 i~

,q?

k

~

1x-

?j L

+.,

-}

. kj

"[

4 f

,2

..j

+.

+

7 s.

p, e

g

\\

) ;~

.' ~. l, yy xl;r } ' > }..

t

ustion Engineering and Bechtel for technical support.

In an attempt to improve performance and promote accountability, the site organfrational structure was changed in 1387 from three units under one to one manager for each unit.

left and a significant decline in performance was noted. Region Y held n -

. mana emen

. NRC concerns periodic meetings with the utility t-

• ~ ~ ' 'l ?,

about the decline in erformance 6.( Ca.; 4 '

fr^.. H.

w.

.,.~........

y 3

9

,

7 c

Y '

-s,

N~'*

[v '

k" y

d w.

sf n

L

+

. ;b y

-x

-1

\\

The performance of Unit 1, which had a nurber of operational incidents, was I

noticeably worse than the other units. The overall SALP results for the I

31,1988 rated operations, period November 1, 1987, through October andsafetyassessment/qua1Ityverificationas radiological controls,1989, J. Martin and V. Stello held a meeting with the In early Category 3.

Arizona Public Service Company board of directors at which time SALP issuesP and other NRC concerns were addressed.toresolvehardwareissue March 5, 1989 (electrical bus transfer).

all three units.

The most significant management change that has occurred s Other changes include the addition of a strong as Executive Vice President.

The Plant Director, Assistant Plant Manager, and Relief Plant Manager.

positions of Quality Assurance Manager and the Radiological Protection Manager and 3 Plant were either filled or replaced as well as were the Unit 1, 2,been strengthened.

Initial indications are that the organization has Managers.

Concern was expressed about the present configuration of the organization and a e.,- n,^ 1...

h

.1 n

.n.

e e

the layers of r.ana.ert-n

. m. f

^

5.f-.kh; f. f f k

l.

k'. :;).q l,

.o 7

e 9

9

F

.a, },..

]

i ENCLOSURE 4

+

NRC Management Meeting May 17-18 1989 RegionI!!

i l

i i

List of Attendees V. Stello J. Taylor H. Thompson T. O. Martin B. Clayton F. Miraglia T. Murley E. Jordan W. Russell R. Bernero J. Scinto R. Martin i

B. Davis B. Hayes T. 60$

D. Crutchfield

5. Ebneter C. Paperiello E. Beckjord J. Partlow J. Martin J. Lieberinan 4

9 b

e i

j

'T

'-* r v

,-..,c,7-m

UNITED STATES i

[

NUCLEAR RECULATORY COMMISSION

~

CIASHINGTON, O. C. 20665 A......

JUN 8 1989 MEMORANDUM FOR:

Those on Attached List FROM:

James M. Taylor, Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Regional Operations, and Research

SUBJECT:

NRC MANAGEMENT MEETING MAY 17-18,1989 Enclosed is a copy of the sunmary of the May 17-18, 1989, management sneeting discussions on problem plants and additional topics. Task assignments and a list of attendees are also provided.

/

JK

~

Ja es M. Tay1

, Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Regional Operations, and Research i

Enclosures:

1.

Meeting Surinary 2.

Task Assignments 3.

List of Attendees l

i.

i information in this record was deleted I

in accordance with the Frcedom of Information Act, exemptions __#

F0IA E9 Je4 8912140110 891205 h

PDR FOIA AMORUSOB9-306 PDR

V.

I ENCLOSURE 1 q

NRC MANAGEMENT MEETING

SUMMARY

May 17-18 1989 RegionIII Focus on Licensee Performance 9

Following the June'1985 loss of feedwater event at Davis-Besse one resulting NRC action was that senior NRC managers periodically meet to d!scuss the plants of greatest concern to the agency and to plan a coordinated course of action. This was the seventh such meeting.

The last meeting was held in Region IV in December 1988.

The meeting in Region Ill was structured to review the status of the plants discussed at the last meeting and to review the )erfor-mance of other plants to determine if any changes should be made to t1e list of l

problem facilities.

In reviewing the plants that have experienced significant performance problems, the NRC managers have set the following levels or categories of performance based upon plant actions to date to correct the problems and to achieve improved operations.

1.

Plants removed from the list of problem facilities.

Plants in this category have taken effective.ction to correct identified No further problems and to implement programs for improved performance.

I NRC special attention is necessary beyond the regional office's current level of monitoring to ensure improvement continues.

2.

Plants authorized to operate that the NRC will monitor closely.

Plants in this category have been identified as having weaknesses that warrant increased NRC attention from both headquarters and the regional l

office. A plant will remain in this category until the licensee demonstrates a period of improved performance.

l

u se 3.

Shutdown plants requiring NRC authorization to operate and which the NRC will monitor closely.

Plants in this category have been identified as having significant weaknesses that warrant maintaining the plant in a shutdown condition until the licensee can demonstrate to the NRC that adequate programs have both been established and implemented to ensure substantial improvement.

The Following Chart Lists Conclusions from this Meeting and from the Previous Meeting Meeting Dates Category 3 Category 2 Category 1 OUTSIDE SCOPE OF REQUEST i

/

NRC senior management plans to review the status of the all reactors on an approximate f-month frequency. Determinations will then be made to add or delete licensees from this list based on demonstrated performance. This program represents a concerted effort by the NRC senior management to focus NRC resources on those plants and issues of greatest safety significance and risk.

l-Specific Discussion of Problem Facilities Plants that have been Removed from the List of Problem Facilities 9-L OUTSIDE SCOPE OF REQUEST

\\

y ft L 4 9.

-q; i(, 4 lOf OUTSIDE SCOPE OF REQUEST I

1 l

J Brunswick 1 and 2.

Brunswick was a discussion plant at the June and December 1988 SMs.

It was selected because of many instances of nonco:npliance, equipment failures, and safety system actuations and because the plant best represents a variety of concerns about CP&L (Brunswick, H.B. Robinson, and Shearon Harris). Key l

among the con: erns which have evolved are inadequate root cause analysis, weak I'

engineering / technical and maintenance support, lack of aggressiveness in identifying and/or following up problems, and poor comunications between various levels of management and staff.

In sunnary, CP&L managesent's approach to operations resulted in their being in a reactive mode which raised a question about CP&L's managceent capabilities.

1 CP&Lhadathirdpartyindependent(cRESAP)assessmentperformedoftheircor> orate functions and the Brunswick plant operations. The CRESAP assessment, althougt generally positive, identified concerns with goal setting, communication of goals, and fragmented managernent. This CRESAP analysis is being extended to the Robinson p ant and may be extended to the Harris plant. Recent personnel changes have been made at senior levels at CP&L including the Executive VP and Senior VP and site management changes have been implemented.

It was concluded that overall performance is improving, but engineering and QA continue as major weak areas. An NRC diagnostic evaluation team (DET) inspec-tion was recently completed at Brunswick that confirmed problems in e variety of areas including root cause analysis, engineering configurtifon c.ontrol, and I.

employee relations. Concern was expressed about limited corrnunications on

~~ '

issues between CP&L plants.

~

7-('~ ;' E

' " ' ' ~

,..,.e

,y; OUTSIDE SCOPE OF REQUEST 1

1 Arkansas Nuclear One 1 and 2 Since November 1988, several events have occurred that represent a decline in the perf m ance at Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO), Additional concern was l

expressed awat overall weakness in corrective actions and equipment control.

Hajor changes in the organization have recently taken place including a new I

site manager. ANO also has had relatively poor connunications with the NRC oarticularly on matters of technical concern. 1 a.. c= --

..r-J 2;

q

.. g ;.;..

,6

' ' k..n. _ - :..... i j f..

...s

~

Palo Verde 1, 2, and 3 Palo Verde has been discussed at each SMM since November 1987. At the time of initial licensing Arizona Nuclear Power Project (ANPP) senior n.anagement was knowledgeable in construction activities but lacking in significant operational experience.

In addition, the engineering organization relied i

heavily on Combustion Engineering and Bechtel for technical support.

In an attempt to improve performance and promote accountability, the site organizational structure was changed ir 1987 from three unit's under one manager to one manager for each unit, following this reorganization several key people i

l 1 eft and a significant decline in performance was noted.

Region Y held periodic meetings with the utility its management to NRC concerns about the decline in performance.

l 1

il L -

i 1

i The performance of Unit 1, which had a number of operational incidents, was i

noticeably worse than the other units. The overall SALP results for the through October 31,1988 rated operations, period Noves6er 1,1987, d safety assessment / quality verification as radiological controls, an Category 3.

In early 1989,J. Martin and V. Stello held a meeting with the Arizona Pubite Service Compay board of directors at which time SALP issues and other NRC concerns were addressed. Presently all three units are shutdown i

toresolvehardwareissuesassociatedwitheventsonMarch3(ADVs)and March 5,1989 (electrical bus transfer). CALs were issued in March 1989 for all three units.,

The most significant management change that has occurred since the meeting with the board of directors includes the appointment of W. F. Conway from FP8L as Executive Vice President. Other changes include the addition of a strong Plant Director, Assistant Plant Manager, and Relief Plant Manager. The positions of Quality Assurance Manager and the Radiological Protection Manager and 3 Plant were either filled or replaced as well as were the Unit 1, 2,been strengthened.

Managers.

Initial indications are that the organization has Concern was expressed about the present configuration of the organization I

the layers of management between Mr. Conway and the plant mana I

I id i

l l

e

..-.-m,

. m.

e

-h Additional Topics Discussed 1.

Discussion with the Chairman Chairman Zech attended the meeting on the morning of May 17 and addressed the managers on agency accomplishments during his tenure as Chairman and other topics. He asked the managers to pass on to their staffs his thanks for their efforts in helping him prepare for Congressional hearings. The Chaiman discussed our relationships with Congress, INPO, and the industry.

2.

Materials Licensees Nine materials licensee facilities were discussed. Two of these facilities were the large pool irradiators owned by Radiation Sterilizers Inc., in Decatur, Georgia,andWesterville, Ohio,whichusetheDOEWESk source capsules containing Cs-137. Currently, the leaking capsules, all at the Decatur facility, have been removed and the Decatur facility is undergoingdecontamination. No capsules leaked at Westerville. All capsuies at both facilities are expected to be shipped back to Hanford by DOE by early 1990. All capsules are remaining under water to prevent the thermal cycling mitich was the apparent cause of pin hole leaks.

Three facilities, Babcock and Wilcox, Naval Nuclear Fuel Division, Syncor Corporation, and U.S. Testing, were identified as having made sufficient progress since the last senior management meeting.

In some cases enforce-ment actions remain to be completed. Then activities and any follow-up inspection activities will be conducted by the appropriate Regions using routine procedures.

Four other facilities continue to require close NRC attention. Safety Light Corporation's site in Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania, requires decontamination and is under a current order that should achieve this objective. Combustion Engineering's facility in Windsor, Connecticut, has an Integrated Improvement Plan for the improvement of its performance in the area of radiation protection and nuclear criticality safety. Progress has been slow with slippage in schedules and lack of aggressive implementation of the plan. The 3M's license to distribute Static eliminators remains suspended. Research and development work on dase devices is still permitted. Although Advanced Medical System, Inc. has completed decontamination efforts, significant NRC attention is required until the licensee demonstrates that contamina-tion remains at acceptable levels during operation, facility modification required by an NRC Order is completed, and staffing for operations is shown to be adequate.

3.

PRA Insights From numerous studies including those supporting NUREG-1150, it is apparent that dominant sequences are very plant dependent.

If generalizations were to be made, it would be that core damage frequencies are governed by station blackout and ATWS for BWRs and by LOCAs for PWRs.

Good support systems, operator recovery, and crossties between systems and units are important variables in determining dominant sequences.

i t

e

+

4.

TestandResearchReactors(TRR)

J A discussion was held on the unique position of TRR:

they often have limited funds and personnel, pose a relatively small risk, get little inspection, and are expected to meet standards similar to power reactors.

Concerns were expressed about having inspections and licensing actions 1

done by power reactor inspectors who are unfamiliar with TRR and their i

constraints.

It was a consensus that these reactors are needed and that we should not impede or burden their operation beyond what is necessary for safety.

It was suggested that it might be beneficial for headquarters to assume responsibility for both licensing and inspection of TRR. NRR is to discuss desirability and feasibility of this with the EDO in about a renth.

5.

Issues Raised During 5/16/89 Meeting of DEDR, NRR, and Regions Significant items from the previous night's meeting were discussed.

It was determined that the NRC Manual should be revised to address how to handle the the situation of NRC personnel seeking outside employment or being approached by licensees with job offers.

It was also decided to look at senior resident inspectors' elements and standards for next year to make sure that it was clear that management expected them to spend a significant amount of time doing actual inspection. There was concern about resident inspector transfers and turnover rate. Stature enhancement for DRS inspectors was to be examined by NRR and the Regions.

It was questioned whether the NRC Manual allowed SALP performance trends (improving / declining)tocovertheentireSALPcycleorjusttheend.

AE00 was to invite two Regional Administrators to observe the headquarters team during the next emergency exercise.

6.

Candidate Topics for Next Mandatory Team Inspection A number of possible areas of inspection emphasis were discussed including: electrical (ac/dcloadcreep, batteries,degradedvoltage),

programs for dedicating commercial parts for use in safety systems, general engineering and technical support, and inspections based on PRA insights. NRR was to get out new guidance in three to six months.

7.

Experience with Rotational Assignments It was generally thought that they benefit both the individuals and the agency. We should be careful to use them where they make sense and not to use them if they will have significant detrimental effects on the mission.

p,,-

.,,.y

.-,,..y c.,

y

.V 8.

Quality Assurance of hRC Activities As a result of a question at an IAEA meeting, the EDO led a discussion of how the agency QA's its own work. While there are many olements of QA apolied to many of our activities and products, we do not have a compre-hensive overall program. NRR was to pull together the major eiments of a QA program and how it might be applied for disucssion at the next senior management meeting.

9.

Professional Staff Conduct The managers discussed several isolated examples of unprofessional conduct by agency employees.

It was decided that the managers could better teach their subordinates by using examples. NRR is to collect the examples and distribute the compilation to the managers. Since one or two examples have arisen during discussion with INP0 Senior Management Course attendees, the EDO staff will get a Regional Administrator to attend the next meeting with an INPO Senior Nuclear Plant Manager class.

10. Connunication of Expectations to Licensees It appears that some licensees are not aware of our expectations in some areas such as in operability determinations for degraded plant equipment and the establishment of JCOs. AEOD is to collect examples and formulate a plan to make industry aware (possibly through INPO). The EDO requested a briefing on the proposed generic letter on operability.

11. Problems with Small Materials Licensees P,egion IV and NMSS discussed numerous problems with small companies holding byproduct materials licenses, primarily well loggers. There are a large number of these licensees that are one or two person companies that may be in financial trouble because of the downturn in the oil >usiness. They often don't have enough business to work full time, some have transferred their sources to others without notification, and a.any can't afford to get someone to take their sources off their hands. DOE is reluctant to take greater than Class C waste and OGC is performing a legal analysis of the DOE situation.

In addition, there is great disparity between performance of different agreement states with regard to these licensees. NMSS is to send a memo to the EDO addressing the appropriateness of continuing to license plutonium sources.

12. LER Cause Code Disp 10ys AEOD presented several different styles of displaying LER cause codes to l

go along with the performance indicators. Each display style had its advantages but it was felt that the " finger" chart was the best overall choice. AEOD is to consider separation of performance data by population groups for the next senior management meeting.

i e

l ENCLOSURE 2 I

MAY 1989 Senior Management Meeting Task Assignments Task Responsible Office 1.

Consider desirability and feasibility of headquarters NRR assuming responsibility for licensing and inspecting test and research reactors. Discuss with EDO in June, 2.

Provide guidance to Regions within three to six months on NRR new areas for mandatory team inspections.

3.

Pull together elements for a QA program for NRC activities NRR and a description of how they could be applied.

4.

Collect instances of staff unprofessional conduct and NRR distribute as anonymous samples to senior managers for training purposes.

5.

Have a Regional Administrator participate in the next DEDR l

meeting with an INPO Senior Nuclear Plant Manager class.

6.

Have two Regional Administrators as observers for the AE00 headquarters emergency response team during the next exercise.

7.

Consider separation of Performance Indicator data by BWR and AE00 PWR population groups for next senior management meeting.

t 8.

Send memorandum to EDO addressing the propriety of continuing NMSS to license plutonium sources.

9.

Provide policy guidance to address NRC personnel seeking NRR l

employment with licensees and licensees approaching NRC I

employees with employment offers.

10.

Verify senior resident inspectors' elements and standards Regions reflect sufficient emphasis on doing actual in plant inspection activities.

11.

Determine whether Pilgrim's 25% hold should be changed to NRR/

35% to allow more effective testing of secondary systems.

Region I (Done) 1 1

Note: All assig w nts are due before the next senior management meeting unless oi.herwise indicated.

1 1

. _ _.. ~.... -,__

7 t..

J. -

J

,1 i

)

ENCLOSURE 3 NRC Management Meeting May 17-18, 1989 i

Region III J

1 List of Attendees V. Stello

)

J. Taylor H. Thompson T. D. Martin B. Clayton F. Miraglia T. Murley E. Jordan W. Russell R. Bernero J. Scinto R. Martin

+

B. Davis l

B. Hayes T. Gody D. Crutchfield S. Ebneter C. Paperiello l

E. Beckjord J. Partlow J. Martin J. Lieberman

)

l l

l

t E

f ADDRESSEES FOR MEMORANDUM DATED

SUBJECT:

NRC MANAGEMENT MEETING, MAY 17-18, 1989 j

i V. Stello, EDO J. Taylor, DEDR H. Thompson, DEDS.

T. Murley, Director, NRR l

R. Bernero, Director, NMS$

E. Jordan, Director, AE00 E. Beckjord Director, RES J.Scinto,dGC J. Lieberman, Director, OE B. Hayes Director, 0!

W.RusseII,RegionalAdministrator,RI S. Ebneter, Regional Administrator, RII B. Davis, Regional Administrator, RIII R. Martin,. Regional Administrator, RIV J. Martin, Regional Administrator, RV l

F. Miraglia, NRR T. Gody, NRR D. Crutchfield, NRR J.-Partlow, NRR T. O. Martin '0DEDR B.Clayton,UDEDR I M

L i

t i

i I

l 1

l l

l

..