ML20042D190
| ML20042D190 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde, Harris, Arkansas Nuclear, Brunswick, Robinson, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 06/08/1989 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Murley T, Stello V, Thompson H NRC, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19332B552 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-89-306 NUDOCS 8912140110 | |
| Download: ML20042D190 (12) | |
Text
\\;
E,.c
.., d JUN 8 1989 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Those on Attached List FROM:
James M. Taylor, Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear Reactor Regulation, h Regional Operations, and Researc
SUBJECT:
NRC MANAGEMENT MEETING MAY 17 18, 1989
(
Enclosed is a copy of the sunnary of the May 17-18,1989, management meeting discussions.on problem plants and additional topics. Task assignments and a list of attendees are also provided.
Original Signed By:
James M. Taylor i
James M. Taylor, Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear Reactor Regulation, h Regional Operations, and Researc
Enclosures:
1.
Meeting Sunnary 2.
Task Assignments 3.
List of Attendees DISTRIBUTION:
VStello JTaylor JBlaha TNartin M ilf DEDR r/f docs: Hanageme i Heeting Information in this record was deleted in accordance with the Freedom of Informat.in Act, exemptions #
- # "" M F01A-0FC
- 0DEDR g w
- DEDR
....... :............... :...g.
NAME :T 0 Martin:em
- JMTg1 r DATE :5/30/89 1 4/30/89 _
l A ?
@/2/%d//O
1, l-8 E
ADDRESSEES FOR MEMORANDUM DATED
SUBJECT:
NRC MANAGEMENT MEETING MAY 17-18,1989
.V. Stello, EDO J. Taylor, DEDR H. Thompson, DEDS T. Murley, Director, NRR Director, NMS$
R. Bernero, Director, AE00 E. Jordan, E. Beckjord Director, RES l
J.Scinto.6GC J. Lieberman, Director, DE B. Hayes Director 01 W.RusseII,RegionalAdministrator,RI l
S._Ebneter, Regional Administrator, RI!
B. Davis, Regional Administrator, RIII R. Martin, Regional Administrator, RIV J. Martin, Regional Administrator, RV 1
F. Miraglia, NRR T. Gody, NRR 4
D. Crutchfield, NRR J. Partlow, NRR T. O. Martin, ODEDR 3
B. Clayton, ODEDR 9
4
- [
g ENCLOSURE 1 i
NRC MANAGEMENT MEETING $lH4ARY J
May 17-18 1989 RegionI!!
Focus On Licensee Perform nce NRCactionwasthatseniorNRCmnagersperiodicallymeettodIscussthe plants of greatest concern to the agency and to plan a coordinated course of 4
l 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-y[l mnce of other plants to determine if any (.hanges should be made to the list of f
c problem facilities.
Inpreparationforthemeeting,NRR"inconjunctionwiththefiverefonalN s'i offices. AE00, and RES, prepared background documents on the plants Inputs for each plant included a summary of the most recent SALP
}[/
j s t
discussed.
a discussion of current operating experience, current NRC
>y.
and SALP historyIvities, and perforunce indicator data. Data pertaining to k./,.U and licensee act
't safety significant hardware issues at the plants was also provided. This
/
information was distributed to meeting attendees prior to the meeting.
It i
provided the basis for review and discussion of each ptot's performance and for senior management identification of those plants un anting increased NRC attention.
In reviewing the plants that have experienced significant perforNnce 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 catepory have taken effective action to correct identified problems and to imp ement programs for improved performance. No further NRC special attention is necessary beyond the regional office's current level of monitoring to ensure improverint 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 remin in this category until the Itcensee i.
demonstrates a period of improved perfonnance.
I
l 3.
Shutdown plants requiring NRC authorization to operate and which the NRC will monitor closely.
f Plants in this category have been identified as having significant weaknesses that warrant maintaining the plant in a shutdown condition j
until the licensee can demonstrate to the NRC that adequate programs have both been established and implemented to ensure substantial improvement.
l The Following Chart lists Conclusions from this Meeting and frtun the Previous
(
Meeting Meeting Dates Category 3 Category 2 Category 1 May 17 18, 1989 Browns Ferry Nine Mile Point 1 & 2 Sequoyah I & 2 0
'l
[t Peach Botton 2 & 3 Fermi 2
(/}
Pilgrim Fort Calhoun Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2 Turkey Point 3 & 4 Surry 1 & 2 g., P, k[l Decere er 6-7 Peach Bottom 2 4 3 Nine Mile Point 1 & 2 Dresden 1988 Pilgrim Calvert Cliffs 1 & 2 Rancho Seco ig i
Browns Ferry Turkey Point 3 & 4 f
Sequoyah ! & 2 lg;$ )
Fermi 2 Fort Calhoun NRC senior management plans to review the status of the all reactors on an approximate (-vr> nth 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 thote plants and issues of greatest safety significance and risk, t
Specific Discussion of Problem Facilities j
i.
Mants that havdeen Removed from the List of Problem Facilities sygoyh 1 and i h,
The sequoyah units were voluntarily shut down in August 1985 to specifically I g(
address environmental qualification issues at the sites as well as to address p
cies and attitude.
3 man r
k
wano 9
)
.e
+
v 4 -
,_m
Q After Unit 2 restarted in May 1988 and Unit 1 restarted in the November 19^].
some startup trips (due mainly to feedwater contro)),lanned refueling outageboth Unit 2 shutdown earlier this year for a p cessfully.
that went reasonably we11. After startup, it again had feedwater control TVA brought in expertise from problems that resulted in several reactor trips.other utilities to help and implement fixes. Recent$ALPresultswereall2'sexceptfor.a3(improving i
i trend)inEngineering/TechnicalSupport.
k Senior VP Nuclear Power Group, and Mr. $. Smith Plant Manager, However,Mr. Smith $asrecently Mr. O. Kingsley,ive effect on the facility.
have had a posit TVA submitted his resignation but will remain until a replacement is found.
(:
has recently cut tte number of personnel at the site from about 2600 to about The staff is closely monitoring the effect of these reductions on plant 4
2100.
safety.
Fermi 2 Feraf 2 was placed on the problem plant list at the SMM held in April 1986, and has remained on the list ever since.
In the three years that fermi has been on I(
the Itst, numerous changes have occurred. A new senior management team was hired to provide strong direction and to impart a nuclear ethic to the staff.
Major organization changes were brought about by the Se
\\
from outside the company into management positions. Althout h program and improvement for y
equipment problems continue to occur, there has been generathe chang n'
Thus the last year.
Overallperformanceandoperationsareimprovinginmostareas,but continuing management attention is required to improve in other areas such as jl effect.
engineering and maintenance.
The NRC will utilize the flexibility provided by the inspection program and
{l
)
other programs, such as SALP, to monitor continuing progress of Detroit Edison.g The NRC staff no longer considers Fermi as having weaknesses tha F
increased NRC-wide attention beyond that provide Fort Calhoun Since the last Senior Manaflement Meeting, the licensee has demonstrated consistent progress in imp lementing their comprehensive action plan referred to as their Safety Enhancement Program (SEP). Under their SEP, the licensee
. has unified their nuclear organization under one Senior Vice President.
improved their safety review functions, estabitshed a functioning system engineering group, and strengthened intraorganizational connunications as w l
as other actions.
l M
The fundamen'tal concerns identified with this facility focused on their ability N to withstand complex challenges as well as their focus i
cantly improved their ability to react to comp [es iden perturbations. During the past year, the chan ex challenges. Moreover, the licensee's staff regularly displays a positive attitude toward problem solving, team work, root cause analysts, and has consistently demonstrated conservative
[
i i
decisions since the last meeting at which this plant was discussed.
__J l
I l
i As to longer ters aspects of the SEP, the licensee has displayed the comitment to keep tse SEP on schedule in all important respects. Only one area,Thisprocedure}
u> grade efforts, is to be stretched out to assure requisite quality.
cianged schedule is acceptalh and deemed appropriate by the staff.
as well as self assessment activities Recent staff assessments and evaluations, issues that require substantive sodiff-have not identified new L
by the If eensee$EP. This has provided increased confidence that the $EP is i
cations of the covering the issues of substance and the progress in i lementing the $EP I
ress in achievin the desired results of lends confidence to the licensee s prop'he Board of Dire tors of CPPD has demon-k tmproved performnce and capability.
strated strong support for the nuclear organization, including substantial
(
l increases in oinancial resources for operation and capital improvements, m
The NRC will utilize the flexibility provided by the inspection program and
"~other programs, such as SALP and continued assessments of the $E', to monitor J
the continuing progress of OPPD. The NRC staff no longer considers Fort Calhoun l
as having wea tnesses that warrant incr,,gased NRC-wide a ;tention beyond that provided through routine NRC programs.
y
_, g g
(
Plants authorized to operate that the NRC will monitor closely I
Nine Mile Point Nine Mile Point was discussed at the previous two Senior Management Meetings
($MM).
Unit I has been shut down since December 1987 and a Confirmatory s
Action Letter (CAL) was issued in July 1988, documenting the licensee's comit-C ment not to restart the unit without NRC permission. Unit 2 restarted April 2, The unit had 1989, following a mid cycle maintenance and surveillance outage.
two scrams dur< ng April.
'q f"
the licensee submitted its restart plan for Unit 1.
Staff Since the last $MM review found that It >rovides a reasonable framework for improvin) performance, Two deficiencies in tie plan regarding training and follow througs on manage-g ment comitments are being reviewed by the licensee.
A recent special team inspection identified many probler.s that were previously identified by the Ifenesee and included in the licensee's plan. However, prior problems still existed with corrective action, comunicatlons, procedure adherence, engineering s port and operators attitude. L$ubstantial effort will be required to effe ive implement the plan and turn around perform nce in a number of key areas
$,4, ecu ve Vice Pr Recent meetings between senior NRC managers Nuclea Lawrence B uss MlGttfAkb%k i
\\'
The apparent absence of a management development progras and lack of plannin) for management changes was a longer tenn concern for staff discussion with tie utility senior unagement. Other concerns discussed included long term problems with upward flow of adverse information, the financial pressure on the company, and the licensee's failure to provide a realistic schedule for restart l
t cf Unit 1.
Peach Bottom 2 and 3 Peach Bottom has been discussed at each $m since April 1986. NRC issued approved a piased startup of Peach Bottom on March 3,1989, following (p
an Order sus >ending power operation on March 31, 1987. The Commission extensive corrective actions including management changes. The unit restart s
and low power operations have been well controlled.
),
NRC has had expanded inspection coverage during the restart and startup activities. Executive Y1ce President - Nuclear Operations, Corbin McNeill, has been personally involved in plant activities. The line-management oversight of plant activities has been effective and demonstrated a conservative ap3 roach toward operations and plant safety. The new shift
{
managers and otier licensed operators have exercised good control. The NRC staff is satisfied with licensee personnel performance. The startup has proceeded slowly and methodically and the licensee has kept NRC well informed of planned activities. The Itcensee is currently authorized to take Unit 2 to b(
351 power.
R,
$g i
Pilgrim Pilgrim has been discussed at each senior management meeting since the plant k'
shutdown and issuance of the CAL in April 1986. On December 30, 1988, the licensee was authorized to restart the plant and operate it at up to Si power.
the licensee was authorized to operate at power levels up to
'l On March 3,1989, Operations up to 55 power were performed safely and in a I
25% full power.
I conservative manner.
i'l Several hardware and personnel problems have been identified during operation in the 5 255 range. The reactor core isolation cooling event of April 12, 1989, had multiple personnel performance causes and was the subject of an i
augmented inspection team review. Concern was expressed based upon the April 12,1989 event that some plant employees had not followed established I
administrative procedures, it was noted that two involved individuals had been disciplined. The May 3,1989 automatic reactor shutdown was caused by inappropriately controlled troubleshooting on a feedwater regulating valve and l
was complicated by a partial containment isolation system activation resulting from voltage transients which occurred after the trip.
Licensee response, root cause analysis and followup to the events were exce -
tionally good and demonstrated Itcensee management's ability to perform ind pth analysis of problems.
The Region 1 Administrator discussed changing Pilgrim's 251 power hold point to 35% so that the feedwater heaters can be put into use and checked out. The Commission would need to be notified prior to making this change, t
N Calvert Cliffs ! and i V
l was ent led as one requ ng c ose e
g at the December 1988 meeting. Prior discussions focused on engintering support, technical / hardware issues, licensee attempts to correct those concerns.
and events involving) procedural noncompliance (including one even in a worker fatality. It was concluded the licensee needed a comprehensive plan to effect a turnaround in performance.
b Since the last $MM, the licensee hes acknowledged the severity of roblems at the plant and has developed a Performance improvement Plan to a
}
the problems, ice Pres r Ener ha r
.A.
Cree lt was no at event review and related s ort term ve act ons were good and, based upon observation of N intenance correc i
work in progress, that the plant had exceptionally skilled craftsman.
(
A ssecial team inspection provided further verification of the existence of pro)1 ems with control of temporary modifications, procedure errors, and failure to follow procedures. Several recent events have indicated that problems discussed at prior meetings are continuing. Several events related to removal of equipment from service and safety tagging including an event involving a ei diver at the intake structure with service water pumps in operation, showed that control room operators were not adequately controlling plant status.
Several events were discussed which occurred during March and April 1989, all t,
of which resulted from inadequate control of work. It was thought that exces-1l sive emphasis on neting schedules, doing too much work, and work that bypassed the planning process were the root causes. The recent extension of the Unit 2 outage and the extension of the Unit 1 shutdown to evaluate pressurizer heater problems are positive signs that the licensee is taking action to get control Other problems discussed at the SHM were ine"fectiveness of QC programs i
of work.
In and procedures, and the licensee's poor procedural compliance history.
licensee staff stated interviews conducted during the special team inspectiong their opinion that procedures were not very good, were guidelines", and that Thus a culture work completion was more important than procedural adhert.t:e. production i
developedinwhichjobcompletion(i.e.
i The team concluded that unless all levels of the orpanfration incorporate into their work activities an emphasis on safety and qua ity over production, the operational events which have characterized the licensee's declining performnce could be expected to continue.
Turkey Point 3 and 4 Turkey Point' continues to be of concern due to lack of management stabilityThe and the inability of the plant to achieve sustained improved performnce.
recent departure of the senior Vice President Nuclear, was considered as a setback in the plant's efforts to improve. However, the appointment of an aggressive, proven nuclear manager as Site YP and recent appointments of a strong, proven plant manager and an operations superintendent with extensive experlence at nuclear plants, have resulted in a strong site management team.
'a 1
n
--,.- n,
.,---,,,~.v.-,,,,_,
,..-.,-,-.,.,,,.-.,.,_n.
The Ifcensee has mde Nogress in the engineering and techn Progress has been Nde on a nue6er of recommendations set forth in a third l
party assessment, and the remaining corrective actions have been scheduled.
Maintenance centinves to be a weak point as evidenced by the results of a maintenance team inspection and a SALP category 3 rating. While m intenance significant weaknesses att11 exist in the instrvment appears to be improvinglment. Other areas of concern include weaknesses in the and control (!&C) depar 6
licensed operator training program and configuration control.
l-tp there is still concern Althoughthesiteorpanizationhasbeenstrengthenedevel management interfac f
l I
about the corporate L
support to improve overall plant erformnce. FP8L ts in the process of D
I recruiting for a senior VP of nuc ear operations.
L i
Surry-a 4RADEnt%
oncerns a resse a a
me wer : Virginia ower u nagement's ac o an aggressive approach towards improving performance, a large Ifst of significant several escalated enforcements, some unagement's reluctance to openly events lcate with the NRC{fve organization tsat lacks sound eva a focus on power jeneration and einimum compliance comun with regulations,he issues. These issues remain as valid concerns. New hard.
a reac significance of t 1
ware and design issees have been identiffed, and a CAL has been issued to address these and some older issues. Corporate and site organizational changes have T
been fostituted and personnel changes have recently been u de. The fcensee's l
efforts have been directed primrily toward short term actions to su> port i
restart of the units. Actions in relation to longer term issues suc) as hardware and design, corrnunications and team building need additional snage.
ment attention.
a i
i The licensee has taken positive steps to taiprove the engineerin and technical support organization and is in the process'of developing a dest n basis Other developments include a recently conducte third party t
reconstitution.
r.
f-r.1 i
review improvement of c w.nciations with th-u..e 1
p.y t:! % / W j j 1;..l
[%; " g 7.;D. ' p W~,,f.., 20 > + f f ' '. ] fMM
_conditIonofthe,Ian
,Q., 7.5 v i<jJ, ' 7 7.e 8- ~
h j % N ht'J'ih}%?vi;&).
- by V M gp4 j
! ^ $.;. M. O (
~
,9 ;
f
- j.7 n. -
tV g jg.
Y p
.+
~
k j kgj - Q" y lf,WJ : C f n r 4 %g % 3 V
.gw
w1
.x y
_$hutdown plants rec:uiring NRC authorization to operate and which the NRC i
will monitor close d 4
f-Browns Ferry 1, 2 and 3 Browns Ferry was identified as a category 3 plant at the October 1986 senior The Browns Terry units were shut down and defueled in 1985 management meeting.
operational events, equi > ment failures,ificant enforcement actions, seve
[
due to continued poor perform nce sign and the inability of m nagement to identify and correct pro)1 ems.
Unit 2 was refueled in early 1989 with a Itcensee projected res September 1989.
implementation of prog'4 to resolve I
ave not ressed as PW=Q1k or program areas be ng wor electrica design, and engineering of include pipe support In addition, there remains substantial work in maintenance an es plant sodifications.
and in procedural upgrades. TVA expects to submit a revised schedule for Unit 2 startup within the next few weeks.
Recent personnel changes seen as having a positive effect include the addition Senior Vp Nuclear Power Group, and I, Zeringue, Site Director.
of 0. KingsleyIy cut the number of personnel at the site from about 3100 to N.
TVA has recentThe staff will closely monitor the tapact of this reduction.
about 2700.
t
,g g - < j j
- 7..
- ' d
.,j q'"
-..,.F
,'"l.' ;
1 y
'l t %'
"I " 3',
.h
~' ~
j ' A
.*i ~
3,_4. -
~
^
g y
v
.e j. g..
t 5
.,,'-(+..} {g-
- g -]f ;.7 v{ - T ;y
,j
- l,
l
(
A, ';
y
.N q,
- 7' g
e.
e u
i 4
. +
4
_y
' p.:..,.
l
, A, i~<
.. c '
,,s m
4 I
v
- r
,. m.
.e t
5 J
,t l
s.
_' [.
lkj
<:r r, l
~
% 1
=
f l.[
?
l9 Q
,.'.[.,
'['
ll
? I c a.. Q,
yT.
.t fj ew.
- 9-
, 9 '. ;.;
i '.,
a
- v...
~
~ !bb '+ ', 'f s' '..,.,,
.\\
' 'i n
- *%~
.n
- 12... }p. y 7.s. { ', ig.,N
{.
}
- f.
- j l
l
~;,
y,4; 7
k v
y
~
{g_
,;.J -..:
n
,{'
' ({?
lli
..* L-
.n; M " p
+
8
.. s ' +t
.y
- 21. I b N ET.. $E." A f
- i Brunswick 1 and 2.
It Brunswick was a discussion plant at the June and December 1988 SMMs.
was selected because of spy instances of noncompliance, equipment failures, and safety system actuations and because the plant best represents a variety j
of concerns about CP&L (Brunswick H.B. Robinson, and Shearon Harris). Key among the concerns which have evolved are inadequate root cause analysis, w 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 levels of management and staff.
approach to operations resulted in their being in a reactive mode which raised a question about CP&L's management capabilities.
T.
),,
CP8L had a third party independent (CRESAP) assessment performed of their cor> orate functions and the Brunswick plant operations. The CRESAP assessment althougi comunicalion of identified concerns with goal setting, being extended to generally positive goals,andfrapmenledmanagement. This CRESAP analysis is she Robinson p. ant and may be extended to the Harris plant. Recent personnel changes have been ude at senior levels at CP&L including the Executive VP and Senior YP and site management changes have been implemented.
It was concluded that overall performance is improving, but engineering and QA AnNRCdiagnosticevaluationteam(DET)inspec-continueasmajorweakareas.
tion was recently ccepleted at Brunswick that confirmed problems in a variety of areas including root cause analysis, engineering configuration control, and y Ir.
employee relations. Concer s ex ressed about 1.mited comunications
&g' p
S between CP&L fI w
J.-
- , j ~.,- ) g. 4 5
y 4,,r
, 9.,4, m; -
e>9.
i a.
- a. _s y,e>
.w
.h.
','h,
^'
b N '. j. '. ' A'l?%d?,;.
g' ]R /,,g[
&.l
. r g p, p :.~
8 t. d...: L
- n A. r." ;.9:.
p:. ;.;.. n C.M % (.hk 4. A.S.N;; ; + %, #.l.W.. ' f n.1.j lL ' t [ ;
o ;;
3 7.
l Arkansas Nuclear One 1 and 2 Since November 1988, several events have occurred that represent a decline intheperformanceatArkansasNuclearOne(ANO). Additional concern was Major changes in the organization have recently taken plac
(
a new d
i site r.anager. ANO also has had relatively poor P
l g c f, articular 1 on matter technical e
Palo Verde 1. 2. and 3 Palo Verde has been discussed at each SMM since November 1987. At the time ofinitialItcensingArizonaNuclearPowerProject(ANPP)seniormanagement was knowledgeable in construction activities but lacking in significant In addition, the engineering organization relied operational e uerience.
heavily on Comustion Engineering and Bechtel for technical support.
In an attempt to improve performance and promote accountability, the site organizational structure was changed in 1187 from three units under one manager to one manager for each unit. Following this reorganization several key people left and a significant decline in performance was noted. Region Y held
.c periodic meetlngs with the utility to sensitize its mana ement to NRC concerns &
a,;;V 7 ; 7 -
s ~'f'~~~~-"
T about the deciine j r;;[ revs ;
g;
- j. y y y [ :..,. i:
.k [., F" k... [. $. '
.j [. $
4 [.I, f.(
y p., L
+;-,.( y 7.
s
...m
\\
ac m -,
..s..?.....
l
r The perforrance of Unit 1, which had a number of operational incidents, was noticeably worse than the other units. The overall SALP results for the 1988 rated operations period Noveeber 1,1987, through October 31,/ quality verification as, and safety assessment radiological controls,1989. J. Martin and V. Stello held a meeting with the Category 3.
In early Arizona Public Service Compary board of directors at which time SALP issues and other NRC concerns were addressed. Presently all three units are shutdown ADVs)and toresolvehardwareissuesassociatedwitheventsonMarch3(March 1987f March 5,1989(electricalbustransfer). CALs were issued in i
all three units.
j The most significant management change that has occurred since the meeting i
with the board of directors includes the appointment of W. F. Conway from FP&L l
as Decutive 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 orgsnization has V
Jrh Concern was expressed about the present configuration of tha organiza n and the layers of man between Mr Conway la r
p-1 i
J s
4
-,-,w-,,r-r
,---,ewon-~-
l
\\
Additional Topics Discussed 1.
Otscussion 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 He asked the managers to pass on to their staff 15 his thanks other topics.
for their efforts in helpine his prepare for Congressional hearings. The Chairman discussed our relationships with Congress, INP0, and the industry.
2.
Materials Licensees 4
Nine u terials licensee facilities were discussed. Two of these facilities were the large pool irradiators owned by Radiation Sterilizers Inc.,in Decatur, Georgia,andWesterville, Ohio,whichusethe00 EWE $f i
source capsules containing Cs 137. Currently, the leaking capsules, all at the Decatur facilityIon ve been removed and the Decatur facility is ha No capsules leaked at Westerv111e. All undergoing decontaminat capsules at both facilities are expected to be shipped back to Hanford by DOE 4
by early 1990. All capsules are remaining under water to prevent the thermi cycling which was the apparent cause of p< n hole leaks.
Three facilities Babcock and Wilcox Naval Nuclear Fuel Division neor Corporation,andU.S. Testing,wereIdentifiedash madesufft Wg~
s since t ment _ meeting P
These activ es an ow up es will be conducted by the appropriate Reptons using i
nspect'on act'y
, 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. Con 6ustion Engineering's facility in Windsor, Connecticut, has an Integrated Improveient Plan for t1e improvement of its perforance in the area of radiation protection and nuclear criticality safety. Propresshasbeenslowwithslippagein schedules and lack of aggressive imp ementation of the plan. The 3M's license to distribute static eliminators rem ins suspended. Research and Althou h Advanced development work on these devices is still pennitted.
Medical System Inc s gnificant NRC attention Is req. has completed decontamination efforts (ha uired until the licensee demonstrates 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,lizations wereit that dominant sequences are very plant dependent. If genera to be made, it would be that core damage frequencies are governed by station Good support systems, blackout and ATWS for BWRs and by LOCAs for PWRs.
operator recovery, and crossties between systems and units are important variables in determining dominant sequences.
l
i 4.
Test and Research Reactors (TRR)
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 lice.nsing actions done by power reactor inspectors who are unfamiliar with TRR and their constraints.
It was a consensus that thete Isactors are needed and that we should not impede or burden their operation be/ond what is necessary j
for safety.
It was suggested that it airlht be benaficial for headquarters i
to assume responsibility for both licens'ng and inspection of TRR. NRR is to discuss desirability and feasibility of this with the ED0 in about a month.
5.
Issues Raised During 5/16/89 Meeting of DEDR, NRR, and Regions s q
- y. y 3,
- (
- w, 3,
~ y g-
.q....'
-Q 7
., f[_
-,.[
+
.j y'
S ' d. u,; i. l ; :n l @T.., d.. '
~
.. hl '. g:. ik f. $Nl?
y l.0 }
- % l_..
.Y -.
L;
(
~"
6 s.
w l
{
h s
..hh],
h n4 a.
.v-
~
"y,i '.., - L.
~~
" h,.y. g..:.g. 9/,*g
- . s. g q[j ' q. 5, p
,,,;j,.(4, 16..
.._ k.
a t
6.
Candidate Topics for Next Mandatory Team Inspection
. +
.w..
v
+w..... M. r -
x w.x
.V 1
.g
, ',9..,..
y.3 i,f. Ay,,;.s. g
,, g r.
c-
,t.-
p-g,.,
i 4
4 4
- 4..
. 3
- l1 '
&Q*::p;.g'.$[y.,:l '% % * ' d.: ).s }'}
?
w
- R '-
R ty;;xi;,ea '.c'l 1 b - l '. ). ' E. ~. -. -.
Y.. '
L:.U.l ?9'Y ' I v O 7.
Experience with Rotational Assignments 5.9 3,. +.
.7 ;;w, a
\\
. ; x; b
.v. 9
_ I
?
3 v g w :, g.n,m. 3, y..
99$
A a..m:c-.
~
g w
l l
l
' i
i I
i 8.
Quality Assurance of NRC Activities y
- -- y
,1 c
g, y f
l L. _
?,- }f 5,.
y x
2-gp j
g
'F i
h Y!h
- f g.
/g a
A l,,
n. ['
_;)
g.
+
f _
- [.l}L
+
- )r 1,,
7;/.Ts.
1
~,
t
~
g ).
,7 -
[.t
[.
I 7
lb.Ng%K <,..
- g.l
~
- ,+y i.*
.-b.
. ~,,
~
- u...a @x,,. ;g A;%.%.
F,,
10 ~
.g:L p.
., +. 3, ~ %
5
". g.W ID.. t "s 4.
S I
i f.",,
1
.l jd$.[.pf;]+n~9;l?/M'A.s..~.,
m i
y win.
a.
1
. ' - %s. f 9
m
$p[gg.,.
N @ 5 ' 4 d % M. h Q Q R.., 9
. {.$ v. f.
~
JiE23 * %.C f,
l
- 11. f>roblems with $ mall Materials Licensees Pegion IV and NMS$ 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 business. They r
i often don't have enough business to work full time, some have transferred their sources to others without notification, and many can't afford to get i
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 situatior in addition, there is great disparity between rf of stes w SEDB.&td 1
j r
I l
- 12. LER Cause Code Displays
-'4:Eyf?.?gg.6'
",t%
- W f 4 * ~. ' i. Q * " O / ".,3 l
b-N
'. N f h,. Of
?....h.
I er,
[-
~'
,(
. M hr.4 f.",
' $ j. '
s
.$ < h
,e,
.y
+ y
~.
y
.s..
(e... J.,; f i.[. f ;0 _ _ ;, ;.,. : r :
hi a &::
u.,
l 1
1 1
' '< t 1
= l ENCt05URE t 4
I May 1989 Senior Management Meeting Task Assignments Responsible Off1ce la,k g
l1RR Consider desirability and feasibility of headquarters 1.
assuming responsibility for licensing and inspecting test and research reactors. Discuss with E00 in June.
l Provide guidance to Regions within three to six months on NRR 2.
new areas for undatcry team inspections.
3.
Pull together elements for a QA program for NRC activities NRR and a description of how they could be app 1ted.
Collect instances of staff un rofessional conduct and NRR V) 4.
distribute as anorymous samples to senior managers for training purposes.
DEDR Have a Regional Administrator participate in the next 5.
meeting w'th an INP0 Senior Nuclear Plant Manager class.
Have two Regional Administrators as observers for the AE00 6.
headquarters emergency response team during the next exercise.
. Consider separation of Perfonnance Indicator data by BWR and AE00 7.
l PWR population groups for next senior management meeting.
l i -- 8.
Send memorandum to EDO addressing the propriety of continuing NMS$
/
to license plutonium sources.
/,
NRR Provide policy guidance to address NRC personnel seeking 9.
employmerit with licensees and licensees approaching NRC en.ployees with employment offers.
Yerify senior resident inspectors' elements and standards Regions 10.
reflect sufficient emphasis on doing actual in plant inspection activities.
I Determine whether Pilgrim's 251 hold should be changed to NRR/
11.
355 to allow more effective testing of secondary systems.
Region 1 (Done) a 1
Note: All assignments are due before the next senior management meeting unless otherwise indicated.
I i
l i
n
- .' ~e i
ENCLOSURE 3 MRC Managesent Meeting i
May 17-18 1989 RegionI!!
l List of Attendees V. Stelle J. Taylor H. Thompson T. D. Martin B. Clayton F. Miraglia T. Murley E. Jordan W. Russell i
R. Bernero J. $cinto R. Martin B. Davis B. Hayes 1
T. Gody D. Crutchfield S. Ebneter
- t. Paperiello E.Beckjord J. Partlow J. Martin J. Lieberman.
6 I
--