ML20059A346
| ML20059A346 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 08/13/1990 |
| From: | Ebneter S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Bradham O SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059A349 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9008230001 | |
| Download: ML20059A346 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000395/1990011
Text
,
.
.
p
=
'D?%i&\\lCbyy
"
,
i
p % t: *:
-
.,
AUG 131990
'
na
,
~
. Docket No. 50-395
License No.cNPF-12
4
Snuth Carolina Electric & Gas Company
ATTN: Mr. 0.1 S. Bradham
1
..
Vice; President, Nuclear Operations
-
-
Virgil.C. Summer Nuclear Station
'P. 0. Box 88-
Jenkinsville, SC 29065
Gentlemen:
-SUBJECT:
SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE
-(NRC.-INSPECTIONREPORTN0.50-39S/90-11)
-This. refers to the'NRC's Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP)'
- Report' for.your V.;C.-Summer Nuclear Station which was sent_to you'on Junet19,
1990; our meeting.of July 10,.1990; and your written comments in a letter dated
.j
JJuly 30,- 1990.
q
-
In your -letter you- took' issue .with the rating in the functional area- df.
'r
p
,
'd
In addition, you expressed: disagreement withithe
perception given by certain wording in the functional areas of:
Radiological
,
Controls; Emergency . Preparedness; andL Engineering /TechnicalHSupport.: .Your
comments were' forwarded to the SALP Board for. their review.- Enclosure 1
Jcontains the-Board's, recommendations to me for disposition.
- d
,
- 1 concur with the Board's recommendations.
Therefore, Enclosure'2 is.an errata
-
to the Initial _ Report and constitutes-the Final Report.
Enclosures 3:through 5
consist of a meeting summary, ' July 10,:1990 SALP slides, and your letter dated
July 30, 1990.
-j
The~ performance at your V. C. Summer facility has.been excellent and1our SALP~
,
report identifies that your efforts have been directed toward~ the safe = opera-
tions of the facility. Your continued commitment to improve overall performance
should lead to continued excellent ratings.
No reply- to this. letter is. required; however, should you 'have any questions
1
'
concerning this' report, I will be pleased to discuss them with you.
Sincerely,
!
Original Skned By:
!
J
Stewart D. Ebneter
Stewart D. Ebneter
i
Regional Administrator
h
Enclosures:
(See page 2)
!
'
l-
9008230001 900813
!
ADOCK 05000395
)
l
l
0
v590
-
.
e
,
p .-
., -
-.
,
,
y. >
,
.
,
,
,t
'
r-
4
Aut/131990
'
!
l South Carolina' Electric-& Gas
2
Company
{
Enclosures:-
W
'1. .SALP Board Recommendations
'
2.
Errata' Sheet
3.
Meeting Summary
'
.
1
4.
SALP. Slides:(7/10/90)
.
%
J5.- SCE&G Comments on Initial
Report.(dated-7/30/90).
/
-
- , , .
.i
<}E
h
cc w/encls:
d,.
'J. L.-Skolds, General Manager.
7
Nuclear Plant Operations
l.
.
'
'
s
Sumer Nuclear Stat. ion
i
P. O.' Box-88:(Mait Code 300)
'!
Jenkinsville, SC 1.29065
)
.W
.
Q
1
' AL R.. Ko'on, Jr. , Manager
Nuciear Licensing-
- 1
"
~ Summer Nuclear Statior.
.l
LP. 0.' Box 88 (Mail Code 612)
.
,
lJenkinsville.-SC' 29065'
d
'
>
Ed. B. Knotts, Jr.
.
.
'
Bishop Cook, Purcell & Reynolds
1400 L Street, NW=
. ' ~
. ' Washington, D. C.
20005-3502-'
"
'
-
i
- ,.
lR.V; Tanner
j
,
' Executive ~Vice President
-l
South Carolina =Public
'
Service.Authoriti
4
-P.10.: Box.398'
-
.
Moncks-Corner,'SC 29461-0398'
.
j
i'
Chairman', Fairfield County Council
'
>
,
P. O, Box 293
-
'-
Winnsboro, SC 29180
_ Attorney General
u
'
Box.11549:
~i
. , -Columbia, SC .29211
1
lw
Heyward-G.1Shealy Chief
Bureau of Radiological Health
1
,
o
4
. South Carolina Department of Health
<
b
and . Environmental Control
.f
-2600. Bull Street
>
I
l
Columbia,~SC 29201
.b'cc w/encls:
(See page 3)
h.
i
'
.
- ,
[;
-g R '
,_ ..
_ __
_ - - _
_ _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ - _ _ - _ _ - ..
>i;
<
'(
.P^
<
-'
,
,
.
.
.
. South Carolina Electric & (?as-
-3
AUGL131990-
Comrat,y
4
r.
,
bec w/encis:
K. - M.' .Carr, Chai rman
-
' T. M. Roberts, Comissioner
.F. J' Remick, Comissioner
K. C.l Rogers, Comissioner
- J. R; Curtiss, Comissioner
J. M.-Taylor, EDO
i
_
!
H. : L. Thompson, 'Jr. , EDO:
a
R..W.:Borchardt. Regional
!
Coordinator, EDO
T. E. Murley,LNRR
l
- S .Varga, NRR.
.
. E. A.-Adensam, NRR
t
J.:J.' Hayes..NRR
j
R..Nease, SALP Coordinator. NRR
l
Regional Administrators, R1, RIII-
d
RIV, and RV
.
l,
'
K. Clark -Rll, PA0.
" ;j
- D.'M. Verrelli, DRP, RII
F. S. Cantrell,-DRP, Ril'
K. Landis,. Chief, TSS.
NRC Resident: Inspector . .
',
DRS and DRSS Branch Chiefs,
= and'Section Chiefs
JINPO
'm
IMPELL
Dj
LDocument Control Desk
j
l
.i
,
n
+
y
.
q
q
l
'
1
>
RII:[ RP-
Ril
S
RII-
NRJ
RII:0RA
7
C 1 'd
.DVerrelli
Ms
erschoff
WCli e
Glain
JMilhoan
.,
i
08/{/90
/$ /90
/
8/y/90
08/',/90
08/C /90 08/ /90
v
'
i
3
_
. . . . . . . . . . . , , . - , , - - -
6
,
-
's
.;
'
-f[ ,
. --
,
, l'
j[
ENCLOSURE 1
SALP BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS
'The SALP Board reviewed the SCE&G wments on the Initial ~ SALP Report for
V. C. Summer. They proposed the following disposition:
.I.
Radiological Controls
1.
Chemistry lack of aggressiveness
Discussion:
The licensee disagreed with the words on page 9, first
j
paragraph, which gives a perception that the chemistry department
lacked aggressiveness in quantifying the resin intrusion event and
providing-timely recommendations.
The Board reviewed the resin intrusion event of February 14, 1989,
-
which was documented in Inspection Report 89-03 at page 4.
Further,
the reactor shutdown on March 10, 1989, due to this event and this
-
event was documented in Inspection Report 89-06 at page 3.
The Board =
believes that the duration of approximately one month to. attempt to
return sulphate and cation conductivity within EPRI ' recommended
lim _its supports the Initial. Report's perception.
Recommenda sn:- Th'e Board recommends no change to the Initial
Report.
2.
Valves containing stellit'
-
Discussion:
The licensee provided clarification that not all valves
containing stellite were 'o .be replaced.
The Board concludes that-
clarification is appropriate.
Recommendation:
The Board recommends the errata to page 7 which is
_
included in Enclosure 2.
11.
Discussion:
The licensec was not satisfied with a: rating of "2" in this
__
functional area.
They believe that their initiatives have led to
improved performance.
In addition, they ccmment on the limited
inspection activity by the NRC staff which was the ' basis for the Board's
evaluation and rating.
The Board reviewed the licensee's comments and agree with the licensee's
statements: and conclusion of improved performance.
Nevertheless, the
Board believes that the weaknesses identified during the drill are
substantiated and support the rating.
Recommendation:
No change to the initial report is recommended.
T
.
I
=--- . _
.
. ..
n
"
\\
=
i
. ,
,
.-
,
.
,
-
4
Cnclosure 1
2
-
__
111. Engineering /Technica'. Support
_
1..
Inconsistent involvement
Discussion:
The licensee did not agree with the words in the
initial report in regard to the overall assessment of deficient
g
engineering involvemeM in routine piant activities and post
modification testing.
1 hey offer that the raport's negative comments
_
are directed toward cases where an individual failed to perform.
The Board's review of the licensee's comments failed to identify any
specificity that would cause the initial report to be changed.
"
Recommendations: The Board recommer.ds no change in this matter.
o
2.
Simulator Certification
L
Discussion:
The licensee provided a correction on the schedule for
,
simulator certification.
Recommendation:
The Board recommends the errata to page 16 which is.
-
included in Enclosure 2.
r=
L
-
,
W
rt
m
-
l
'
o
!
-
4
i
we
h
r
-
-
_
_ _ . .
..