ML20058D927
| ML20058D927 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Kewaunee  |
| Issue date: | 07/20/1982 |
| From: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Mathews E WISCONSIN PUBLIC SERVICE CORP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058D932 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8207270448 | |
| Download: ML20058D927 (7) | |
Text
I DM8 a
o July 20, 1982 Docket No. 50-305 Wisconsin Public Service Corporation ATTN:
Mr. E. R. Mathews Senior Vice President Power Supply and Engineering Post Office Box 1200 Green Bay, WI 54305 Gentlemen:
This refers to the management meeting held by me and other NRC representa-tives with Mr. C. W. Giesler and other representatives of Wisconsin Public Service Corporation on June 17, 1982, to review the results of the NRC's assessment of the utility's regulatory performance in connection with KRC Manual Chapter 0516 - Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) and covering the period November 1, 1980 to March 31, 1982.
A preliminary copy of the SALP Report was provided for your review in advance of our meeting. The final SALP Report including the SALP Board Chairman's letter to you and your written comments concerning the report is enclosed.
In addition to the assessments and recommendations made by the SALP Board contained in the enclosed SALP Report, I wish to give you my overall obser-vations and assessment relative to the utility's regulatory performance during the assessment period:
1.
With respect to the SALP ratings, the Regional SALP Board views the Category 2 rating as the rating which it anticipates most licensees will achieve. A Category 1 rating is given only for superior per-formance and there is reasonable expectation that it will continue.
A Category 3 rating is given when the licensee's performance is considered minimally acceptable and identified weaknesses warrant special licensee management and NRC attention.
8207270448 820720 DRADOCK05000g ggg /
F4 Wisconsin Public Service 2
July 20, 1982 Corporation 2.
It is my view that the overall regulatory performance of Wisconsin Public Service Corporation at the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant has improved during this SALP period. This improved performance and management's improving responsiveness to regulatory issues has placed Kewaunee among those plants with the best regulatory performance in Region III.
While I recognize the company prides itself for the quality of its personnel and the use of these personnel to sustain a quality opera-tion, I.do concur with the SALP Board recommendations that management controls should be formalized to ensure that the high quality of plant performance is continued.
3.
In regard to your letter dated June 25, 1982 commenting on the SALP Report, we acknowledge the error in the report concerning the appoint-ments of the Fire Protection Specialist and Fire Marshall.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the SALP Report will be I. laced in the NRC's Public Document Room.
No reply to this letter is required; however, should you have any questions concerning these matters, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
Sincerely, Original signed by James G. Keppler James G. Keppler Regional Administrator
Enclosure:
SALP Report No. 50-305/82-12 I
cc w/ enc 1:
D. C. Hintz, Plant Superintendent DMB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS) l Resident Inspector, RIII r
John J. Duffy, Chief l
Boiler Section Stanley York, Chairman Public Service Commission 1
RIII/p
/[
Ko(relius RII
/
{IIT RII R
RII Tambling/sv essar n
Davis K
1 g g ry 5 lli 7[/) p 7/7/82 v
q lt t
e SALP-RIII U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE Wisconsin Public Service Corporation KEWAUNEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Docket No. 50-305 Report No. 50-305/82-12 Assessment Period November 1, 1980 to March 31, 1982 June 1982 L
CONTENTS Page 1.
SALP Board Chairman Letter to Licensee iii 2.
Licensee Comments
..................... vi I.
Introduction...........
1 II.
Criteria..............................
2 III. Summary of Results 3
IV.
Performance Analyses 4
V.
Supporting Data and Summaries 19 A.
Noncompliance Data................................... 19 B.
Licensee Report Data....
20 C.
Licensee Activities.................................
21 D.
Inspection Activities 21 E.
Investigations and Allegations Review...............
23 F.
Escalated Enforcement Actions
..................... 23 G.
Management Conferences 23 11
(
Docket No. 50-305 Wisconsin Public Service Corporation ATfN:
Mr. E. R. Mathews Senior Vice President Power Supply and Engineering Post Office Box 1200 Green Bay, WI 54305 Gentlemen:
This is to confirm the conversation between Messrs. M. L. Marchi, Kewaunee Technical Supervisor, and R. L. Nelson, NRC Senior Resident Inspector, scheduling June 17, 1982, at 9:00 a.m. as the date and time to discuss the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) for the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant. This meeting is to be held at the Region III Office in Glen Ellyn, Illinois.
Mr. J. G. Keppler, Regional Administrator, and members of the NRC staff will present the observations and findings of the SALP Board. Since this meeting is intended to be a forum for the mutual understanding of the issues and findings, you are encouraged to have appropriate representation at the meeting. As a minimum, we would suggust Mr. C. W. Giesler, Vice President, Nuclear Power, and Mr. D. C. Hintz, Manager, Kewaunee Plant, and managers for the various functional areas where problems have been identified attend the meeting.
The enclosed SALP Report which documents the findings of the SALP Board is for your review prior to the meeting.
Subsequent to the meeting the SALP Report will be issued by the Regional Administrator. to this letter summarizes the more significant findings iden-tified in the SALP Board's evaluation of the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant for the period of November 1, 1980 to March 31, 1982.
If you desire to make comments concerning our evaluation of your facility, they should be submitted to this of fice within twenty days of the meeting date.
Otherwise, it will be assumed that you have no comments.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice" Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter, the SALP Report, and your response and commitments (or your comments, if any) will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room when the ShLP Report is issued.
iii
O Wisconsin Public Service 2
Corporation The response (or comments) requested by this letter are not subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-5111.
If your have any questions concerning the SALP Report of the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant we will be happy to discuss them with you.
Sincerely, J. A. Hind, Director Division of Emergency Preparedness and Operational Support
Enclosures:
1.
Significant Findings 2.
Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant SALP Report (5 copies) cc w/encls:
Resident Inspector, RIII iv
ENCLOSURE 1 Significant Findings While problems were identified during the seventeen month assessment period, November 1, 1980 to March 31, 1982, overall performance was very good. High performance was noted in two very important areas, Operations-and Radiological Controls, continuing what was rated "above average" during the previous assessment period. Maintenance and Refueling are two other important areas where high performance was observed.
In all other functional areas, performance averaged over the period was good. Degrada-tion was not observed in any area while improvments were observed in the-areas of Fire Protection, Emergency Preparedness, and Licensing Activities.
Problems noted early in the period with respect to IE Bulletin responses were resolved.
One area identified as needing improvement was in the formal control of various plant activities.
Procedures, documentation requirements, and other Quality Assurance activities appeared lacking in providing adequate management controls. This area was noted both in an Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) Inspection Report dated April 1981, and by the NRC l
Performance Appraisal Section (PAS) Inspection Report (50-305/81-27) of l
March 1982.
Although the quality of personnel appeared to compensate for the lacking formal controls, the Board believes' improvements are necessary to assure the high quality of plant performance is sustained.
i I
I y