ML20087E084
| ML20087E084 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 12/09/1991 |
| From: | Skolds J SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CO. |
| To: | Ebneter S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20087E065 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9201210018 | |
| Download: ML20087E084 (4) | |
Text
w g,,gg.>...
......m...
SCE&O
- 0EC '0 9 BSI~
.~
_ ENCLOSURE 5 Hr. S. D. (bneter U. $. Nucle 6r Regulatory Comission Recion !!, $ vite 2900 104 Marietta Street, NW Atlanta, Gemrgia 30323 De6r Mr. (boctert t
Subject:
V!'AGil. C. SUMMER W'JCLfAR STATION DCCA[T NO. 50/395 OMRAilhG LICENSI O. NPF.12
$1$ilRA11C A$5LSSPINT Of t.lCCNSCC PLRFOR$NCE (NRC INSPECTION R(PORT NO. 91 10)
South Carolina Clectric t Gas Company ($CEM) acknowledges ai :eint or tse Systematic usessment of Li;ensee Performance ($ ALP) Retort N?. 71
'.7, Ated Novtmber 0,1991, for Virgil C. Sumer Nuclear Station, ali appreciates the oppo tunity to discuss the content of the report in the h;vember 14,1991, meeting.
Attached are SCEW's specific cements on the report.
If you would like to discuss these items in more detail, please call t/s 4,t your convenience.
Very truly your h
John L. Sko'dt ARK:JL5iled Att ache.ent c:
- 0. W. Dixon Jr.
R. R. M6han R. J. White General Managers G. I'. Wunder J. B. Knotts Jr.
NSRC NRC Resident Inspector Ri$ (IE911900)
~
File (8.15.01) l NUCLEAR EXCEL'.EHCE - A SUWER TPADITION!
9:>o w oO.,3 enO10e
= - - - - -.
=-.
IW ItJOCK 05000393 i
<b ppt m
Attachment to Mr. 5. D. fbneter letter 11 911900 Page 1 of 3 VIRGIL C. SUWER NUCLEAR STA110H SALP REPORT CO*EH15 EQNJ_QPIPATIONS The wtaknesses identified to regard to the valve Control program and the fire protection program are of the programatic nature for which enhancements either have been made or will be made.
PADIOLOGlQL(ONTROL$
Our aggressiveness in achieving ALAP.A will result in being below the industry thret year averagt for radiation esposure by the end of 1991.
There are )wo minor corrections to this sectjon of the report. Paragraph 4 on p69e 6 addresses the 'pumber of ALAPA suggestions made during thit evaluation period and the previout "he CorrtCt numbers,
gare 39 for the previous period,and,,eva1V4 tion period.,139 for KalNT[RANCC/SVRVMWC{
Ve are aggressively pursuing improvements in the area of post raintenance testing and have implementeo portions of this new program during the recently completed refueling outage. We have also nade enhancements to the preventive Saintenance program to, correct this identified weakness. In regard to the items concerning the number of personnel errors in the maintenance and surveillance areas. Several corrective actinns have been initiated. These actions appear to be effective, in that we habe seen a reduction in personnel errors as evidenced through our internal assessments.
Finally, we have agreed to disagree on the issues concerr.ing the Condensate Storage Tank (CST) failure. We believe that we did not make a nonconservative decision based upon the fKts that were tvailable at the time.
(NEMEHCY PREPAAEONESS We believe that significant improvements have been made in the [n.ergency Preparedness area during this evaluation period. The station emergenc/
plan response personnel were involved in two major exercises during this SALP period, with only one kRC identified waakness. This weakness was identified in the first exercise. This weakness was addressed.'nd programatic changes were inade which climinated the concern during the second exercise. It should also be noted that the improvements to exercise performance, listed as examples in the report, were mostly identified by SCC &G personnel, thus demonstrating our ability to be self critical of emergency preparedness
- performance.
L
Attachment to Mr. 50 00 [bneter tetter 1[ 911900 i
1 Page 2 of 3 We are not latisfied with the performance of operators in cialsifying emergency conditions and are allelling program enhancement $ (i.e., standard Call and intelligent loft =6re) to aid the operators.
It thould be noted that thest performante problems ettributed to training are not similar to those icentified in the previout SALP report.
In the previous report, there was a training administration problem that reluited in an individual missing his annual emergency planning gwtiification training.. That problem was eliminated with changes to the training tracking system.
The $1ren syntes weaknell =45 self identified.
SCCLG has been aggressively pursuing the installation of a new system in order to fit the activation problems and e'ic.ance the overall reliability of the system.
it 15 recognited that the pottibility of the concern identified in the report exists, wherein the public could lose confidence in the current $yttem. $CCLG is concerned about any conplaints/ concern $ f rom the general public. These corplaints/ concern $ have been adoressed in a personal and Straightforward fashion. The installation of the new tyttem it currently in process, with the post modification te$ ting scheduitd to be completed in January 1992.
$C[tG recognizes the responsibilities tr' the Emergency Preparedness area and will continue to strive to accortplish improvements.
ECVRlTf SC[LG has no specific t,om.cnts in this area.
QQLN(( alm /1fOtNICAt 5tlPPORT Sr.[LG believes that signif. cant improvement has been acccmplished in the area of Engineering / Technical Support during this evaluation period. Specific management attention has t, ten focused or. implementing inprovements in the overall engineering function and in the day 40-day engineering support of the plant. We were disappointed that our efforts on Reliability Centered Maintenance program delelonent were not acknowledged in the SALP report, even though the NRC has demonstrated a keen interest in the impact of maintenance on the safe operation of the plant.
We were aiso surprised by the negative coments on our performance on the Generic funoamentals Exam. We knew that some of the individuals taking the exam were marginal, but we felt that they deserved the benefit of an independent view on the Generic fundamentals Exam, in the past, 90/no-go scrutiny has been reserved for our license applicants. Accordingly, we have not had a new license applicant ever fr.11 a licanse c 4m.
In the future, we will apply sistler scrutiny to the Generic fundamentals candidates, it should be noted that, although we were given a rating of *2" in this area, we have had no suggestions /recomendations in the previous two SALP reports.
h i
Attachrent to Mr. $. D. ILneter tetter it 911900 Page 3 of 3 SAffTY AH($$hQ1/M,llTY VCRlfj{A110N We Art very pitt$td with the introved rating 1: thit category f rom 4 previout
$ ALP period of *?' to a reting of '1" in this ec$t recent SALP period.
This recognites the considerable anunt of ef fort of 411 N00 personnet to ensure that Virgil C. $utper Nucletr $tetion 4 operattd in 6 ggf e m6nner.
Kt would like to offer three items of clarification on information Cont 61ned in thil $tCtion. The fir $t 15 in regard To the '... older $6f ety illuel...'
discussed in the inst 06ra r6sh on page 18. The issues were c6tegorized as
" potential' $6fety it$tti.brough our review prott$1 And h6ve rtCeived 66 equate attention t,ated on the potenti41 saf ety Significance of the items.
We are sensitive to the age cf tht$t items and are continuing to work to regolve them. The leCond itet of clarification it in referente to the scheduit f or personnel to 4ttend Senior Reactor Oterotor Certification Training 45 6ddressed in the first paragraph on page 19.
This clast is scheduled to pornente in January 1992 a,s' opposed to 'the end of 1991."
Finally, also in reference to the first paragraph on page 19, we would like to clarify that it is our intent to h6ve certain key division managers obtain the Senior Reactor Operator certification or the $tnior Reactor Operator licente, but hot necessarily all managers within the Nuclear Operatinns
's Division.
O w..