ML20043G044
| ML20043G044 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 06/01/1990 |
| From: | Martin J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | Walt T PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20043G045 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9006180455 | |
| Download: ML20043G044 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000344/1990009
Text
,
._
__
. _-
.
_ _
__
_ _ _ _ _
__
_ _ _
_ _ _ _ . , _ . .
+
.
,
...
/
'as ( (
'
UNITED STATES
U p
'-
.
NUCLEAR REOULATORY COMMISSION
'
REOt0N V
"
'
i
JUN 1
1993
Docket No. 50-344
,
Portland General Electric Company
121 SW Salmon Street
,
Portland, Oregon 97204
Attention:-
Mr. T. D. Walt
'
Acting Vice President, Nuclear
'
Gentlemen:
'
-SUBJECT:
SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE,
REPORT NUMBER 50-344/90-09
,
!
,
The NRC Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) Board has
-
completed the periodic evaluation of Portland General Electric company's (PGE).
performance at the Trojan Nuclear Power Plant for the period January I',1989
through March 31, 1990.
The performance of Trojan was evaluated in the functional areas of plant-
operations, radiological controls, maintenance / surveillance, emergency
engineering / technical support, and safety assessment /
security,The criteria used in conducting this assessment and the-
preparedness,ication.
quality verif
i
SALP Board's evaluation of PGE's performance in these functional areas are
contained in the enclosed SALP report.
Overall the SALP Board found the performance of licensed activities at Trojan
to be acceptable and directed toward safe facility operation. The Board noted
in particular the absence of any significant operations events during the
fifteen month SALP period, and weighed this aspect of performance heavily in
concluding that a SALP Category 1 rating is a]propriate in the plant
operations functional area.
In considering t1e overall PGE performance at
-Trojan, the Board recognized the actions taken during the last half of the
assessmentperiodtostrength%ntheTrojanmanagementteamandtoimprove
..5
-
p(erformance in specific areas through the Nuclear Division Impro
,
- functional' area in the enclosed SALP report, however in general the Board
concluded that PGE should continue'to im)1ement the actions outlined in the
Furt1ermore the Board recommendcd that
,
Nuclear Division Imarovement Plan.
PGE ensure that mec1anisms are in place to provide prompt feedback on the
effectiveness cf actions implemented.under the NDIP.
The Board's most prominent concern was in the functional area of
Performance in this area was considered to have
Maintenance / Surveillance.
declined to a Category 3, from a Category 2 following the previous SALP
the Board considered the planning, schedulin; and
assessment.
Specifically/s,urveillance work activities to be weak, and t1e
oversight of maintenance
quality of associated procedures and work instructions to be in need of
'
f
9006180455 900601
I
ADOCK 03000344
Q
-
. .
-
.. -- .
.
.
..
--
-
- -
-
_._
. . . . .
.
..
,
.
2
's
-
y
Illustrative of these concerns were the deficiencies identified
-improvement.
with the containmen'. sump midway through the SALP period, and the work
planning and scheduling problems which occurred while preparing for the 1990
Although the Board observed an improving trend at the very
refueling outage.
end of the period, this area clearly warrants close future scrutiny by PGE
management.
In the functional area of engineering / technical support, the Board concluded
However the Board noted
that overall performance was at a Category 2 level.that there were a number of s
technical work and notably weak technical work. A recent example of weak
performance in this area was the failure of the engineering organization to
recognize that the main steam line flow engineered safety features setpoints
,
This error was
were in violation of the Technical Specification requirements.The Board
subsequently identified by the operations Shift Supervisor.
recommended that high priority be assigned to permanently filling the position
of Manager, Nuclear Plant Engineering (NPE), and that actions be considered to
.both with NPE personnel and with System
provide for staff stability, Board furthermore considered it important that the
The
and to
Engineering personnel.
actions being taken to promote consistent, high quality technical work,llowed
complete the Design Basis Document program, be continued and closely fo
by PGE management.
The Board considered the performance of Quality Assurance (QA) audits during
This
this assessment period to be a major improvement over past QA audits.
conclusion contributed significantly to the Board rating the SafetyYou are
Assessment / Quality Verification functional area as a Category 2.
-
and independently assess
encouraged to continue to demand that QA critically,he Trojan Nuclear
The Plant Review Board and t
performance at Trojan.
Operations Board continue to be considered in need of improvement in
identifying programmatic deficiencies at Trojan.
A management meeting to discuss the results of the SALP Board's assessment has
1990,attheTrojansite.
Arrangements for the
been scheduled for June 15, discussed further with your staff in the near
management meeting will be
future.
In that your performance was evaluated as Category 3 in the
maintenance / surveillance functional area, you are requested to provide a
within 30 days after our forthcoming meeting, which
written response
Comments
addresses your plans to improve performance in this functional area.
on other portions of the SALP report may be provided as appropriate.
A summary of the SALP Board's assessment is provided in Section II
enclosed report.
are discussed in Section IV, Performance Analysis.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Par
Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations i
SALP report will be placed in the NRC s Public Document Room, as well as any
comments you may wish to submit to the NRC regarding the content of the SALP
report.
-
_
_
__-_--_
_
_
- . <
3-
. r. -
..
The NRC's Office of Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data performed an
This assessment was provided as input
assessment of licensee event reports.to the SALP process; a copy is, therefore, p
e,
enclosed report.
The response requested by this letter is not subject to the clea
Reduction'Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
Should you have any questions concerning the SALP report, we will be pleased
to discuss them with you.
(
ely,
.
J. B. Martin
Regional Administrator
-
Enclosures:
SALP Report Nos. 50-344/90-09
Attachment 1 Enclosed in SALP Report
ec w/ enclosures:
S. Bauer, PGE-
C. P. Yundt, PGE
PGE
L. A. Girard,ith, DOE
D. Stewart-Sm
.
.
b
l
.
I
3
'
-
..,.,..i
,
t.
<
,
. ,; J g ; ,
>g
e
.
L
4
- .
,
a.
-sp
y:
<
.bec w/ enclosures:
F
>
.
- J. Grant,-NRR
-
P. Prescott',- NRR
e
.
' M.! Slosson, OED0 ~
>
,
R.:Beven, NRR
J. Martin-
-
'
'.
"
.B. Faulkenberry
>
' " .
G. Cook
' *
.
'
.
Resident Inspector
- -
'
'
- ,
u.
Pro,jectInspector
i"
Chairman Carr
.
-
.
i
'
-Commissioner Roberts-
,
-
'
'.
- "
Commissioner Rogers
-
'
-
Commissioner Curtiss
v
c
1
. Commissioner Remick
k
F
'
'
<
-
--J. Taylor, EDO
<
.
<
<
.
,
LJ. Sniezek, ED0
,J'
'
'
..
. T. Murley, NRR .
'
'
~
-
.
'J.
Lieberman, OE
-
<
s
,
'.
bec w/o enclosures::
,
,
.
'
J. Zo111 coffer, RV
M. Smith, RV
,
N. Western
'
-.
,-
CONCURRENCES:
- SeV
K
VW
RScar //(
.
'4
1 chards
DKirsch
JLarkins-
,
l-
6/.I/90
6/J /90
6/\\/90
6// 90
M
E
PY.
T
PYq
EST
PY
U T
PY ?
,.
7
~
~
PR
WI
- '.a
.RZimmerma
JMar in
.
6/ / /90:
.6
]
JEST COPY ." REQUEST COPY
./ NO-
' YES '/ NO
-
.
-v
1
i
TO PDR J.
t
YES / N0
]
~
,
f
,
e
'
%
,