Text

Forwards SALP 12 Rept 50-255/93-01 for 920401-931030.Concurs W/Ratings of SALP Board Assessment
	ML20058G069
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades
Issue date:	12/01/1993
From:	Martin J; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:	Morris M; CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
Shared Package
ML20058G079	List: IR 05000255/1993001; ML20058G069;
References
	NUDOCS 9312090091
	Download: ML20058G069 (7)
	v • d • e

_. . _ _ . _ . _ . . _ . _ . , -. _

a !

,

.

.h

'

N

!

Ogc 011993 l

i

1 h

Docket No. 50-255 !

!

Consumers Power Company 1

ATTN: Michael G. Morris ;

Executive Vice President

and Chief Operating Officer

1945 West Parnell Road

Jackson, MI 49201

Dear Mr. Morris:

.[

Enclosed for your review is the SALP 12 Report for the Palisadec Nuclear >

Plant, covering the period April 1,1992 through October 30, 1993. As

discussed between D. Rogers of your staff and M. Parker of this office, a !

meeting to discuss this report with you and your staff has been scheduled at !

1:00 p.m. (EST), on December 14, 1993, at Lake Michigan College. During this j

meeting you are encouraged to candidly discuss any comments you may have !

regarding our report. While this meeting is considered a presentation and ,

discussion forum between Consumers Power Company and the NRC, the meeting will ;

be opened to any other interested parties as observers.

In accordance with NRC policy, I have reviewed the results of the SALP Board

Assessment and concur with their ratings. While it is my view that your >

conduct of nuclear activities in connection with the Palisades facility was

adequate, my conclusion is that your performance has declined significantly i

over this past year. The decline is attributed in large'part to outage ,

activities. The adverse events and conditions disclosed during the Summer :

1993 refueling outage also appear to be indicative of long standing underlying ;

problems that were not previously recognized or fully understood by your i

organization. Careful attention to these issues on your part is needed to

ensure that performance will not decline further. In addition, management

needs to ensure that their expectations are adequately conveyed to plant staff 3

and that the staff carries out these expectations. :

!

Plant Operations and Engineering both received Category 3 ratings. In the !

Operations area, weaknesses were observed in operator performance and ,

intradepartmental communications in the conduct.of both normal and infrequent :

'

activities such as the excessive cooldown rate of the primary coolant system

and continued problems with the reactor vessel disassembly. In the 1

Engineering area, the unavailability of some design information and an I

incomplete understanding of plant design continued to have a negative impact i

in the resolution of identified problems. A failure to resolve previous

occurrences of stuck fuel assemblies led to a third such event this SALP i

period. Significant weaknesses were also noted in several plant j

modifications. ;

9312090091 931201

PDR- ADOCK 05000255 f ,

O PDR a / .,

e

o

. .

Consumers Power Company 2

You received Category 2 ratings in Maintenance and Plant Support reflecting

overall good performance in these areas; although, maintenance was previously-

a Category 1. The condition of equipment was considered to be good with a few

notable exceptions. Work planning and prioritization were also considered

good. However, the quality of maintenance work was inconsistent, primarily

'

due to continued problems with the control of contractors. In the area of '

Plant Support, early implementation of the revised 10 CFR 20 was excellent and

reflected strong departmental management support. In addition, the source

term reduction efforts were good. The implementation of the dry cask storage

project was a strength. A significant weakness was noted in the

'

nonconservative management decisions involving the chemistry analyses and the

radiation survey indications of failed fuel.

The decline in performance in several areas is significant and reflects poorly

on your overall self-assessment program, including your Quality Assurance (QA)

audit activities and your offsite review committee. Problems were not ;

promptly identified and corrected. The QA organization lacked technical depth I

in some areas. Instances of ineffective corrective actions were noted across 1

the functional areas. Management involvement and oversight of ongoing field

activities were also not sufficient to prevent problems from occurring and

failed to detect where management expectations were not being met.

At the SALP Meeting you should be prepared to discuss our assessments and your

plans to address performance in the areas of Operations and Engineering, )

including your reviews and conclusions regarding the apparent decline in these i

two areas. Additionally, you are requested to respond in writing within 30

days after the meeting, specifically addressing corrective actions planned to

improve your performance in the areas of Operations and Engineering.

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 placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.

Should you have any questions concerning the SALP report, we would be pleased

to discuss them with you at the meeting on December 14, 1993.

Sincerely,

John B. Martin

Regional Administrator

Enclosure: SALP 12

Report No. 50-255/93001

See Attached Distribution (see attached concurrence)

Rlli Rlll RIII RIII RIII RIII

Orsini Kobetz M.McB Hasse Jorgensen

Rlli LaTorre

R111 Rlll NRR* RII RII

2

TMartin Forney Axelson

Concurrence by telephone

Dean M Y J{Ma'n

/2- / / /

. . - . - . - . . - _ -

___ _. _ . _ _ _ _ -. _ _ _ _ _ . - ._ _. . -

!

c ,.

fjfC0i M

Consumers Power Company 2

-

You received Category 2 ratings in Maintenance and Plant Support reflecting I

overall good performance in these areas; although,' maintenance was previously ;

a category 1. The condition of equipment was considered to be good with a few '

notable exceptions. Work planning and prioritization were also considered

good. However, the quality of maintenance work was inconsistent, primarily due ,

to continued problems with the cont'rol of contractors. In the area of Plant i

Support, early implementation of the revised 10 CFR 20 was excellent and

reflected strong departmental management support. In addition, the source

term reduction efforts were good. The implementation of the dry cask storage

project was a strength. A significant weakness was noted in the

nonconservative management decisions involving the chemistry analyses and the

radiation survey indications of failed fuel. *

The decline in performance in several areas is significant and reflects poorly ,

on your overall self-assessment program, including your Quality Assurance (QA) t

audit activities and your offsite review committee. Problems were not .

i

promptly identified and corrected. The QA organization lacked technical depth

in some areas. Instanccs of ineffective corrective actions were noted across ,

the functional areas. Management involvement and oversight of ongoing field- l

activities were also not sufficient to prevent problems from occurring and f

failed to detect where management expectations were not being met. ,

-!

At the SALP Meeting you should be prepared to discuss our assessments and your !

plans to address performance in the areas of Operations and Engineering, !

including your reviews and conclusions regarding the apparent decline in these !

two areas. Additionally, you are requested to respond in writing within 30 ,

days after the meeting, specifically addressing corrective actions planned to

improve your performance in the areas of Operations and Engineering.

'

In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2,

i Title 10, Code of federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the SALP-

report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room. :

Should you have any questions concerning the SALP report, we would be pleased

to discuss them with you at the meeting on December 14, 1993. '

Sincerely, l

John B. Martin !

Regional Administrator

Enclosure: SALP 12

Report No. 50-255/93001 i

See Attached Distribution (see attached concurrence) l

Rill RllI Rlll RIII RIII Rill !

Orsini

/% k h

LK'obetz M.McB Hasse Jorgensen LaTorre !

Rlli RIII RIII NRR* Rlli Rill !

du

Tlartin Forney Axel son Dean Miller JMartin !

Con 9urrence by telephone i

y&\% 1

'I

-l

!

_ . , _ _ . - _ ,.

_ _ . . _ . - -. - , _ - . , _.

- _ . . . - _ . . . - . _ . .

. . j

I

l

Consumers Power Company 3

Should you have any questions concerning the SALP report, we would be pleased :

to discuss them with you. -

>

Sincerely,

John B. Martin

Regional Administrator .

Enclosure: SALP 12 !

Report No. 50-255/93001 l

cc w/ enclosure-

David P. Hoffman, Vice President i

Nuclear Operations ;

'

David W. Rogers, Safety

and Licensing Director

i

OC/LFDCB

Resident Inspector, RIII

James R. Padgett, Michigan Public

Service Commission

Michigan Department of

Public Health '

Palisades, LPM, NRR

SRI, Big Rock Point

INPO ,

i

The Chairman

Commissioner Rogers

Commissioner Remick

Commissioner de Planque

OEDO

T. E. Murley, Director, NRR

Associate Director for Projects, NRR

Director, Office of Enforcement ,

W. T. Russell, Associate Director for Inspection and

Licensee Performance, NRR

C. F. Holden, Jr., SALP Program Manager, DRIL, NRR (2 copies)

F. R. Allenspach, NRR

A. R. Blough, Director, Project Directorate III-I, NRR

DRP Division Directors, All Regions

C. D. Pederson, RIII

L. Cox, RIII

TSS, RIII

RIII files

RIII PRR ,c

n V i

il RIII RIII RIII RIII RI"I, >

!. ,pb> 4Nt?B MNb t a <

sink 4 tz M.McB sy rgensen 'orre ajD

,- s RIII RI' RIII g NRR*Hasse y>oyRIII RIII

TMa tin o hy* Axe ea /N Miller JMartin ;

Con rrence b telephone gg.h

4

>

.

.:+ .

mfGu UNITED STATES

f

D

gi k NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMtsslON

REGION til

% ; ,"C res noostvtLT nono

& GLEN ELLYN, ILLtNOIS 60 W

..... :

t

DECGi1993 l

Docket No. 50-255 l

l

Consumers Power Company !

ATTN: Michael G. Morris }

Executive Vice President l

and Chief Operating Officer <

'

1945 West Parnell Road

Jackson, MI 49201 ;

!

Dear Mr. Morris: ,

i

Enclosed for your review is the SALP 12 Report for the Palisades Nuclear i

Plant, covering the period April 1, 1992 through October 30, 1993. As .

discussed between D. Rogers of your staff and M. Parker of this office, a l

meeting to discuss this report with you and your staff has been scheduled at :

'

1:00 p.m. (EST), on December 14, 1993, at Lake Michigan College. During this

meeting you are encouraged to candidly discuss any comments you may have j

regarding our report. While this meeting is considered a presentation and -

3

discussion forum between Consumers Power Company and the NRC, the meeting will !

be opened to any other interested parties as observers.

In accordance with NRC policy, I have reviewed the results of the SALP Board l

Assessment and concur with their ratings. While it is my view that your !

conduct of nuclear activities in connection with the Palisades facility was ,

adequate, my conclusion is that your performance has declined significantly i

over this past year. The decline is attributed in large part to outage !

activities. The adverse events and conditions disclosed during the Summer j

'

1993 refueling outage also appear to be indicative of long standing underlying

problems that were not previously recognized or fully understood by your j

organization. Careful attention to these issues on your part is needed to !

ensure that performance will not decline further. In addition, management {

needs to ensure that their expectations are adequately conveyed to plant staff !

and that the staff carries out these expectations. t

Plant Operations and Engineering both received Category 3 ratings. In the ;

Operations area, weaknesses were observed in operator performance and ;

intradepartmental communications in the conduct of both normal and infrequent !

activities such as the excessive cooldown rate of the primary coolant system I

and continued problems with the reactor vessel disassembly. In the ,

Engineering area, the unavailability of some design information and an ;

incomplete understanding of plant design continued to have a negative impact !

in the resolution of identified problems. A failure to resolve previous j

occurrences of stuck fuel assemblies led to a third such event this SALP .

period. Significant weaknesses were also noted in several plant !

modifications. j

l

I

!

,

- - -.-- - _ - _ . . - ~.

!

.. t

>

!

MC011333

Consumers Power Company 2

i

!

You received Category 2 ratings in Maintenance and Plant Support reflecting j

overall good performance in these areas; although, maintenance was previously

'

a Category 1. The condition of equipment was considered to be good with a few !

notable exceptions. Work planning and prioritization were also considered i

good. However, the quality of maintenance work was inconsistent, primarily !

due to continued problems with the control of contractors. In the area of [

Plant Support, early implementation of the revised 10 CFR 20 was excellent and !

reflected strong departmental management support. In addition, the source :

'

term reduction efforts were good. The implementation of the dry cask storage

project was a strength. A significant weakness was noted in the i

nonconservative management decisions involving the chemistry analyses and the

radiation survey indications of failed fuel. i

i

The decline in performance in several areas is significant and reflects poorly l

'

on your overall self-assessment program, including your Quality Assurance (QA) l'

audit activities and your offsite review committee. Problems were not

promptly identified and corrected. The QA organization lacked technical depth ,

in some areas. Instances of ineffective corrective actions were noted across

the functional areas. Manafement involvement and oversight of ongoing field

activities were also not sufficient to prevent problems from occurring and -

~j

failed to detect where management expectations were not being met. t

-

'

At the SALP Meeting you should be prepared to discuss our assessments and your f

plans to address performance in the areas of Operations and Engineering, i

including your reviews and conclusions regarding the apparent decline in these l

two areas. Additionally, you are requested to respond in writing within 30 l

days after the meeting, specifically addressing corrective actions planned to ;

improve your performance in the areas of Operations and Engineering. l

t

'

In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, t

Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the SALP i

report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room. .

i

Should you have any questions concerning the SALP report, we would be pleased

to discuss them with you at the meeting on December 14, 1993. ,

>

!

4 Sincerely, ;

cL d -

.

John B. Martin

Regional Administrator '

'

Enclosure: SALP 12 '

Report No. 50-255/93001

See Attached Distribution i

!

'

I

r

i

. . . . . . _. _ _ - .

,

t

i

.. , .;

I

'

. Consumers Power Company 3

[6C 2

'i

l

Distribution: j

cc w/ enclosure: f

David P. Hoffman, Vice President I

Nuclear Operations .{

Gerald B. Slade, General Manager .j

David W. Rogers, Safety ;

and Licensing Director l

OC/LfDCB :

Resident Inspector, RIII -l

James R. Padgett, Michigan Public j

Service Commission !

Michigan Department of j

Public Health

Palisades, LPM, NRR

SRI, Big Rock Point

INFO i

~l

'

The Chairman

Commissioner Rogers

Commissioner Remick !

Commissioner de Planque !

OEDO

T. E. Murley, Director, NRR ,

Associate Director for Projects, NRR -!

Director, Office of Enforcement !

W. T. Russell, Associate Director for Inspection and '

Licensee Performance, NRR . .

'

C. F. Holden, Jr., SALP Program Manager, DRIL, NRR (2 copies)

F. R. Allenspach, NRR

A. R. Blough, Director, Project Directorate III-1, NRR

DRP Division Directors, All Regions -

C. D. Pederson, RIII :

L. Cox,-RIII i

TSS, RIII j

RIII files ;

RIII PRR l

f

i

!

i

!

..

$

i

l

~. ..

ML20058G069

Text

Navigation menu

Search