ML20028A378
| ML20028A378 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 11/10/1982 |
| From: | Kintner L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Eisenhut D, Mattson R, Vollmer R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8211190335 | |
| Download: ML20028A378 (5) | |
Text
-
I
]
DISTRIBUTION:
i
- Dxument>Contr
- 1;(50-341)cm
~
NRC PDR PRC. System NOV 101932 LB#1 Rdg MRushbroook LKintner TNovak Docket flo. 50-341 BJYoungblood MEMORAtIDUM FOR: Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director, Division of Licensing Roger J. Mattson, Director, Division of Systems Integration Richard H. Vollmer, Director, Division of Engineering Brian Grimes, Director, Division of Emergency Preparedness, IE THRU:
B. J. Youngblood, Chief Licensing Branch flo. 1 Division of Licensing Thomas H. flovak, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing FR0't:
Lester L. Kintner, Project Manager Licensing Branch Ho. 1 Division of Licensing
SUBJECT:
ilRR INPUT FOR FERMI 2 REPORT ON SYSTEftATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PEPFORMANCE (SALP)
Enclosed is a draft of elRR input for the Fermi 2 SALP report of the interval from October 1,1981 to September 30, 1982. This input is based partly upon assess-ments from the following staff reviewers who have participuted substantially in the licensing review for this reporting period: Byron Siegel, ORB 42, DL; Charles Nichols, ETSB, DSI; Frank Witt, ChEB, DE; and Falk Kantor, EPLB, DEP. A summary of their assessment is provided in Enclosure 2.
Please review the attached draft. Comments received prior to November 15,1982 will be considered for incorporation into the final report.
"Ori66al Sign ~j ay.
Un mter L Kinter, Project Manager 8211190335 821110 Licensing Branch No.1 DR ADOCK 05000 Division of Licensing
Enclosures:
1.
Input for Ferni 2 SALP Report 2.
Evaluation Summary cc w/ enclosures:
9sw l/f a
..k...N.iih.[
. DL,:L,Bk((,(, ',,,DL~: ley,kjh,,,,D,(@/,(c '
omce>
...,7,,gantor
.(Ki n,t,ne r,,: c,w 3J,y,hh,h1,9,9,,,,,,J),i,f,0'.82,...
F d
o'ya k suame >
11.le.pl.82,,.,uz!;,za.2,...,,,,,u am>
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usaea au--um unc ronu m oo an sacu eaa
l ENCLOSURE 1 (HRR lilPUT FOR SALP)
Facility Name:
Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Licensee:
Detroit Edison Company NRR Project Manager:
Lester L. Kintner I.
Introduction This report presents the results of our evaluation of the licensee's per-formance of licensing activities during the period October 1,1981 through September 30, 1982.
It is intended to provide NRR's input to the systens atic assessment of licensee performance (SALP) review process as described in the NRC Hanual Chapter NRC-0516.
The method of evaluation was:
(1) select licensing activities which involved a significant amount of staff manpower; (2) obtain connents on licensee's perfornance from NRC staff who had significant contact with the applicant or his work product for these activities; (3) characterize each licensing activity by a performance category for applicable performance attributes as defined in HRC Manual Chapter NRC-0516; and (4) assign an overall performance category based on the individual categories, with appropriate consideration of the significance of individual activities. This evaluation is based on staff input froa four branches in four divisions.
II.
Summary of Results The performance of Detroit Edison Company in the functional area of licensing activities is rated Category 1.
Manaqement attention and involvement are oriented toward nuclear safety and resources are ample and effectively used in almost all licensing activities. In one area, updating the FSAR, licensee attention should be increased since only minimally satisfactory performance is being achieved.
III. Criteria Evaluation criteria, as given in URC Manual Chapter HRC-0516, were used for this evaluation.
IV.
Performance Analysis The licensee's performance evaluation is based on a consideration of seven attributes as given in Manual Chapter HRC-0516. For the NRR licensing activi-ties during this report period, four of the attributes were not applicable because the plant is in the construction phase:
enforcement history; report-ing and analysis of reportable events; staffing (including management), and; training and qualification effectiveness. Therefore the overall rating is based on the other three attributes: management involvement in assuring omce>
sussuis>
ocre>
OFFIClAL RECORD COPY usom mi-mm Nac ronu sia tio-son nacu o24o
7
- 2.-
quality; approach to resolution of technical issues from a safety stand-point, and; responsiveness to NRC initiatives. Management involvement was evaluated for only two activities because there was no basis for evaluation of other activities.
The following licensing activities were evaluated.
RGiew of post accident sampling program.
Review of modified radwaste system.
Review of Mark I containment modifications.
Evaluation of emergency preparedness plans and exercise.
Updating of FSAR Providing design information for RIII inspection activities.
Preparing technical specifications.
Review of new issues (Board flotifications).
The composite results for the three attributes applicable to this report period follow.
A.
fianagement Involvement in Assuring Quality There was consistent evidence of prior planning and assignment of priorities. Decision making was consistently at a level that ensures adequate management review. Reviews were timely, thorough, and techni-cally sound. These attributes of management involvement were evident in the areas of emergency preparedness licensing activities, including the full scale exercise, and in the submission and revisions of the Plant Unique Analysis Report for the Mark I containment nodifications.
(Rating: Category 1) 8.
Approach to Resolution of Technical Issues from a Safety Standpoint In four of the eight activities, licensing demonstrated a clear under-standing of issues, and in almost all cases provided technically sound, I
thorough, and tinely resolutions. These four areas are resolution of I
open issues in post accident sampling programs, providing information regarding the modified radwaste system, oroviding design information for RIII inspections, and preparing technical specifications.
In activi-ties involving resolution by owners groups or the HSSS vendor, such as Mark I containment and new generic issues raised in Board flotifications, tt'e approaches to resolution were generally sound and thorough but reso-lution target dates are not well defined. However, generic resolutions are not completely under licensee's control.
In one area of emergency preparedness activities, developing emergency plans and procedures, the licensee's understanding of NRC guidance on emergency action levels is generally apparent but much work remains in this area to obtain an acceptable plan and procedures. However, *:icensee's performance in alnost all other areas of emergency preparedness activities resulted in technically sound, thorough and timely resolutions.
(Rating: Category 1) l omcE >
su m ue>
DQTE )
anc ronu sia oma sacu om OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usom wei_23m
.s.
C.
Resoorisiveness to HRC Initiatives Licensee provided timely initial submittals and technically sound and thorough responses to staff requests in almost all cases for five of the eight activities:
post accident sampling, modified radwaste sys-tem, !! ark I containment plant unique analysis report, design information for RIII inspections, and technical specifications. For two activities, emergency plans and new issues, responses were generally timely and sound, but repeated extensions of time were required for a few long standing regulatory issues. In one area, amending the FSAR to incor-porate technical infornation provided by letters during the HRR FSAR review, the licensee has requested frequent extensions of time. Most of the letters involved in the update were provided prior to July 1931, when the staff issued its Safety Evaluation Report. The licensee,has impleaented a computer tracking system to assure implementation of connitments, whether made by letter or FSAR amendment. However, the FSAR update is needed for Rcgion III inspections.
(Rating: Category 2) l l
l l
l l
e l
o,,,,
suanAue>
ocrep Nac roau sia tio-son r4acu o24a OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usce mi-.us-wo
I 4.
EHCLOSURE 2 SUM MRY OF ASSESSMENT OF FERMI 2 LICEUSING ACTIVITIES FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER 1, 1981 TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1982 Performance Category **
Licensing Reviewer Management Resolution Responsive-Involvenent of Issues ness Activi ty Input
- _
1.
Post-accident F. Witt No Basis 1
1 sampling 2.
Modified Radwaste C. Hichols Ho Basis 1
1 Systems 3.
Mark I Contain-B. Siegel 1
2 1
ment 4.
Emerger.cy Plans F. Kantor 1
2 2
5.
Updating FSAR Ho Basis No Basis 3
6.
Providing infor-Ho Basis 1
1 mation for RIII Inspections 7.
Technical Specifi-No Basis 1
1 cations 8.
New Issues No Basis 2
2 Overall 1
1 2
- The Licensing Project Manager provided input for all activities.
- Categories are defined in HRC Manual Chapter HRC-0516 as follows:
" Category 1 - Reduced HRC attention may be appropriate. Licensee management attention and involvement are aggressive and oriented toward nuclear safety; licensee resources are ample and effectively used such that a high level of performance with respect to opera-l tional safety on construction is being achieved.
Category 2 - HRC attention should be maintained at normal levels.
Licensee management attention and involvement are evident and are concerned with nuclear safety; licensee resources are adequate and are reasonably effective such that satisfactory perfornance with respect to operational safety or construction is being achieved.
Cateqory 3 - Both HRC and licensee attention should be increased.
l Licensee management attention or involvement is acceptable and considers nuclear safety, but weaknesses are evident; licensee resources appear to be strained or not effectively used such that ninimally satisfactory perfornance with respect to operational safety or construction is being achieved."
t omcr >
suamur) ocre p nne ronu sis o>80) NRCM 024J OFF1ClAL RECORD COPY usam um-mm