ML20134F941

Final Response to FOIA Request for Documents.Records in App C Encl & Will Be Made Available in PDR

ML20134F941
Person / Time
Issue date:	02/06/1997
From:	Racquel Powell NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
To:	Kendall P CHICAGO TRIBUNE, CHICAGO, IL
References
FOIA-97-4 NUDOCS 9702100217
Download: ML20134F941 (2)

Text

v.a. ..vv6Lan n L u v u a vn f vvmmsWu8W d

NHC FOAA REGvEST NuM8ERtS)

]

• , FOIA 0004 l

[

_j *

• RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF RESPONSE TYPE x 1 FINAL (2nd } l l PARTIAL

/ INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST o^

• .e.e FEB 0 61997 DOCKET NUMBE R(St (if app / cable /

T.EOUESTE R Peter Kendall I PART 1.-AGENCY RECORDS RELEASED OR NOT LOCATED (See checkedboAes)

No agency records subject to the request have been located.

No odditional agency records subject to the request have been located.

Requested records are available through another public distribution program. See Comments section, Agency records subject to the request that are identified in Appendix (es) b are already available for public inspection and copying at the X NRC Public Document Room,2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC.

Agency records subject to the request that are identified in Appendix (es) are being made available for public inspection and copying tt the NRC Public Document Room,2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC,in a folder under this FOI A number.

The nonproprietary version of the proposal (s) that you agreed to accept in a telephone conversation with a member of my staff is now being made available for public inspection and copying at the N RC Public Document Room,2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC, in a folder under this FOI A number.

Agency records subject to the request that are identified in Appendix (es) may be inspected and copied at the N RC Local Public Document Rcom identified in the Comments section.

Enclosed is information on how you may obtain access to and the charges for copying records located at the NRC Public Document Room,2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC.

X Agency records subject to the request are enclosed.

Records subject to the request have been referred to another Federal agency (ies) for review and direct response to you.

Fees X (NONE)

You will be billed by the NRC for fees totaling $ I You will receive a refund from the NRC in the amount of $

in view of N RC's response to this request, no further action is being taken on appeal letter dated , No.

PART 11. A-INFORMATION WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE Certiin information in the requested records is being withheld from public disclosure pursuant to the exemptions described in and for the reasons stated in P&rt II, B, C, and D. Any released portions of the documents for which only part of the record is being withheld are being made available for public inspection and copying in the NRC Public Document Room,2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC in a folder under this FOI A number, COMME NTS The records identified on enclosed Appendix C are the remaining records responsive to your request. Copies of these records are  ;

enclosed.

You are not being assessed processing fees since the minimal fee limit has not been exceeded. This completes NRC's action on your request.

k(

r \

/- (~ f 's P

&lGNA E, DlR DIVIStON OF F M OF INFORMATION AND PUBLICATIONS SE RVICES a

.f<  :  ;

[3[ W Y;c0h .

y; , .

Y  ? Y, a >g @O '

r.~

, y-M o ihs'B 9702100217 970206

• f '

M,W M ,'A .t .4 "e 4

PDR FOIA M W'* f gif KENDALL97-4 4

Qg w r PDR a

• g' - SgnA , y7 - f [f gy - 4W *+ ' @*'

S:

NZC FEM 464 (Part 1) (191)

)

l F

i Re: FOIA-97-9994 APPENDIX C l

DOCUMENTS MAINTAINED AT THE PDR l l

MUMBER DATE DESCRIPTION /ACC. MO.

1. 11/27/96 Weekly Information Report for Week )

Ending 11/22/96 by J. Blaha, )

(2 pgs.), Acc. No. 9612040277. l l

2. 11/27/96 Letter from W. Subalusky to NRC, subject: " Response to SALP 13 Report for LaSalle Station, (8 pgs.), Acc. No. 9612030280.

3. 12/18/96 Preliminary Notification PHO-III-96-074, subject: " Outages Extended to Address Operation and Design Issues," (1 pg.), Acc. No.

9612200090.

4. 12/30/96 Letter from W. Subalusky to A.

Beach, subject: " Actions to Address Problem Areas and Accelerate Improvement at LaSalle Station, (2 pgs.), Acc. No.

9701080177.

5. 12/24/96 Weekly Information Report for Week Ending 12/20/96 by J. Blaha, (2 pgs.), Acc. No. 9701020282.

6. 1/2/97 Weekly Information Report for Week Ending 12/27/96 by J. Blaha, (2 pgs.), Acc. No. 9701070114.

i l

l l

~-

FOLA/PA REQUEST (fhitatto bthittle Case No: f7_'P 9 Date Redt / 7- -

Agon02 Pa a k

, EEo*55ls"adE RelatedCRse:

Nuclear Regulatory Commission '

Freed.om of Information Branch Washington, D.C.

BY FAX ,

b January 6, 19M ' i 1

To the branch director:

This is a request under the Freedom'of Information Act as amended (Title 5, U.S. Code, Section 552).

I wish to obtain copies of all documents pertaining to the.1996 Inde- l p;ndent Self Assessment at Commonwealth Edison's LaSalle and Zion Nuclear Power Stations.

This would include, but not be limited to, electronic notes, memoranda cnd/or e-mail compiled or sent after a December 13 exit meeting between the utility and the assessment team. NRC staff was present at the macting.

If all or any part of my request is denied, please list the specific exceptions on which you are relying to withhold the information. If you datermine that portions of the requested rnaterial are exempt from release, I will expect, as FOIA requires, that you provide me with the non-exempt portions.

I am prepared to pay search fees and copying costs up to $50 for the rcques'ted material, but ask that you waive any such fees.

If you have any question concerning this request, please call me at 1 (312)222-3296.

Si 'ol y ,

P srCM/ Kenda\1N Reporter Chicago Tribune 435 N. Michigan Ave..

Chicago, IL 60611 '

voice: 312-222-3296 FAX: 312-222-4674 (Please phone before f axing.)

f Is'

, ,i " ,i UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORI COMMISSION WASHN6GTON, D. C. 30086 INFORMATION RIPORT fi November 27. 1996 11CY 96-243 I

! far: The Comissioners EIM: James L. Blaha, Assistant for Operations, Office of the EDO

. Sub.iect: WEEKLY INFORMATION REPORT - WEEK ENDING NOVEMBER 22, 1996 Contents Enclosqte l

Nuclear Reactor Regulation A i

Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards B

< Huclear Regulatory Research C*

Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data D i

General Counsel E*

F 1 Administration Information Resources Management G*

Controller H*

Personnel I

' - Small Business & Civil Rights J*

Enforcement K*

State Programs L*

M Public Affairs International Programs N Office of the Secretary 0*

P i

Region I P

Region 11 P

t Region 111 Region IV P*

Executive Director for Operations Q*

Congressional Affairs R*

• No input this week.

i J

m s L. 8 a 2 ssistant for Operations, OEDO

Contact:

l B. McCabe, OEDO 415-1721 SECY NOTE: TO BE MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE IN 5 WORKING DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS PAPER. [,((

w~

i

.c . - - - . __ _ _ _ _

j ' -

Region III 1

Items of Interest Week Ending November 22, 1996 l

Confimatory Action letter Issued to Commonwealth Edison Com.21nY A Confirmatory Action Letter (CAL) was issued by NRC Region III to l

Commonwealth Edison Company regarding concerns with Dresden Nuclear Power Station's control of calculations and with the overall performance of site and corporate engineering activities. These concerns were identified by the Independent Safety Inspection's preliminary evaluation of Dresden Station's safety performance. The CAL confirms actions that the utility will take in l

response to NRC's concerns and also details notifications, results and l documents that the utility will provide to NRC Region III.

U Canwealth Edison Meetina -- Zion and LaSalle Nuclear Power Stations A management meeting was held in the NRC Region III Office, Lisle, Illinois, on November 19, 1996, between NRC senior managers and Commonwealth Edison Company senior managers. The meeting discussion focused on Comed's independent self assessment for LaSalle and Zion Nuclear Power Stations. This assessment, consisting of document review and onsite visits, began on October 22, 1996. A final report is scheduled to be issued January 17, 1997. The assessment team consisted of 17 members primarily from outside of Comed. The j team is evaluating operations, maintenance and testing, engineering and l

technical support, plant support, and management and organization. A key focus of the team is to determine why past efforts to improve performance at l

the two stations have been ineffective.

American Electric Power Comoany Meetino -- 0.C. Cook Nuclear Power Station i

On November 18, 1996, a management meeting was held in the NRC Region III Office between NRC senior managers and American Electric Power Company senior l

j managers. The meeting discussed the status of 0.C. Cook Nuclear Power Station's Final Safety Analysis Report reconciliation, the plan by the utility l

' to improve operator performance and the general issue of equipment preconditioning.

Predecisional Enforcement Conference with Northern States Power Comoany )

On November 22, 1996, a predecisional enforcement conference was conducted in the NRC Region Ill Office between management representatives from Northern States Power Company and members of the NRC staff. The purpose of the l conference was to discuss inspection findings at the Prairie Island Nuclear Power Station. An apparent violation that was discussed at the conference

' concerned the failure to determine that an unreviewed safety question existed on the non-seismic intake canal and to seek a license amendment.

My3 pod Medical Systems. Inc. - Cleveland. Ohio l

On November 21, 1996, a management meeting was held at Advance 1 Medical Systems, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio, between NRC staf f and Advanced vedical l ENCLOSURE P NOVEMBER 22, 1996 l  ;

i i .

t 1

! l j

~~ -- -

i . .n m n .n su u . . . . . - w..

f i., in n ,<n.r.m. s.nn.

l

.. .; s..m m n. .

\1.irwoh - 1. o I 4 e 1 "T

., w. s o . . < . .

l l l l

l l

November 27,1996 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

Response to Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) 13 Report  !

LaSalle County Nuclear Generating ?.ation Units 1 and 2 i NRC Docket Numbers 50 373/50-374 i

Reference:

A. B. Beach letter to W. T Subalusky dated October 17,1996, l transmitting the NRC SALP 13 Report for LaSalle County  !

Station i i

Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed) appreciates the NRC staff meeting with us and presenting the SALP 13 report on October 29,1996, as well as affording us the opportunity to provide our views on the SALP results.

We agree with your assessm' 7t of overall Station performance and we are disappointed in the decline in those areas you have indicated. The reference letter requested that we respond to the SALP Report addressing our actions for performance improvements in the areas of plant operations, maintenance, and engineering. This letter provides LaSalle's comments to the SALP 13 Report.

Our method for improvement at LaSalle consists of a basic three step approach. The first step is to establish the basic fundamentals of effective management, such as follow up, accountability, high standards, and critical self-assessment to effect near term improvement in human performance.

The next step is to implement effective improvement planning by starting with short-term results oriented plans, and using the fundamentals referred to above, progressing to long-term plans. The third step is to put in place the processes and actions needed to maintain improvements achieved.

These include on-going self assessments, worker involvement, and significantly improved training.

1- '

l N N Nk ONbO373 N 0 u, s

I Based on a number of human performance errors, a work standdown was initiated on October 12,1996. During this time, I met with all site departments to discuss LaSalle's performance and to communicate my expectations for both supervisors and workers. Special emphasis was placed on the first line supervisor in implementing their oversight of ongoing work and the need to coach and correct worker performance. Four key points were emphasized: (1) self-checking is expected, (2) follow procedures or stop work and correct 1:,e deficient procedure, (3) report low level problems via Problem Identification Forms (PlFs), and (4) apply peer  !

checking and peer pressure to improve LaSalle's human performance. The ,

subsequent slowdown of work as our staff paid greater attention to following l procedures and the increase in procedure changes and self-identified .

I procedure related problems indicate some degree of success. However, use l l

of and adherence to procedures is still at an unacceptable level, our human  !

performance error rate remains unacceptably high, and additional effort is required.

One important result of this standdown was the establishment of weekly departmental human performance meetings. A group of station personnel meet to determine the human performance topics to be discussed at these meetings based on the previous week's performance.

Managers have been directed to observe activities in the field, take appropriate corrective action, and provide written reports of these observations to the Station Manager and Site Vice President. The quality of these reports varies widely but is generally unacceptable and indicates our managers have a considerable amount to learn in conducting observations.

Further direction and guidance is being provided.

The second step is our short term focused planning effort intended to achieve measurable improvement in station performance, while at the same time, training our management team on how to implement improvement planning that uses accountability and focuses on results rather than actions.

This effort initially involved the review of existing action plans for LaSalle and selecting those items that are essential to long-term success, yet achievable in the short term. The results of this effort are reflected in our Upgraded 1996 Operational Plan.

The difference between this and past plans is that this plan does not try to be all encompassing. We have specifically limited plan activities to a set that are important and can be accomplished to show results by the end of December 1996. Our Upgraded 1996 Operational Plan, which has been discussed with the NRC Resident inspectors, includes the following elements:

2

~

1 Safe Plant Operation - Key elements of the plans in this area are directed at l achieving measurable improvement in safe plant operation and include: l

• reduce operator challenges (work-arounds, temporary alterations, main control room distractions) j e improve operator performance through increased observation I and coaching

. correct processes that challenge safe operation (out-of-service activities and plant labeling)

Effective Work Manaaement - Key elements of the plans in this area focus on improving maintenance and work control including:

. reduce maintenance rework l

. improve work execution e improve work package and procedure quality 1 Effective Plant Support - The plans in this area differ from those in the  !

above areas because of the need to establish fundamental management activities in the engineering area. These plans, therefore, have fewer measurable results, but focus on achieving short term improvements in technical support of the plant and the operating organization. The plans include:

. improve root cause determination and identification of necessary immediate and long term corrective actions e take short term actions to assess and improve conformance to the design basis

= improve Engineering communication and interfaces with Operations, Maintenance and Work Control e implement fundamental Engineering management tools e implement short term actions of System Engineering improvement plan

. improve the quality of safety and operability evaluations A weekly accountability meeting is being held where Action Plan Sponsors and Action Plan Team Leaders discuss assigned actions and progress towards achieving plan results. Support of other groups is requested at this meeting to ensure that any barriers to success are removed. Managers are accountable to ensure success of these near term plans. We are focused on achieving results, not just on performing activities. All members of the LaSalle staff are encouraged to understand the focus areas and objectives l and be knowledgeable of the progress and results achieved.

l l

l 1

3

l Following is a discussion of improvement efforts in operations, maintenance, and engineering, including some examples from the Upgraded 1996 Operational Plan.

Operations We have placed special emphasis on the fact that " Operations is in charge."

I met vdth each shift manager to reinforce this expectation and solicited input l as to what we could do to accelerate that change. Shift managers "in ,

l charge" has been communicated to all site personnel. The shift manager is l now part of the LaSalle Management Team. This Team has a daily meeting ,

in the shift manager's office to discuss plant issues and allow the shift j manager to solicit any help needed to ensure safe plant operation. We  ;

understand the need for an immediate safety focus culture change. The J LaSalle Management Team is working with ali site personnel to support operations and to understand and remove barriers in this regard.

Operations management continues to stress key human performance attributes for safe, effective work including the need for a questioning l

attitude, self-check, peer-check, and procedural adherence. These are reinforced by management observations, weekly simulator evaluations, and debriefs of crew performance. This supervisory observation effort is focused on the most important areas and the results are used in regular discussions between Operations Supervisors and Operators.

Examples of operations involvement in the LaSalle Upgraded 1996 Operational Plan include the following elements directed at short-term operationalimprovements:

Reduce Operator Challenaes: Several actions are underway to improve  !

plant material condition. One is by reducing operator work-arounds.

Seventy-six work-arounds currently exist. Operations, Maintenance, and Engineering have worked together and identified nineteen work-arounds to be eliminated by the end of the year. The remaining fifty-seven will each ,

have an individual action plan and schedule for resolution developed by l December 31,1996. Beginning in 1997, as workarounds are identified, they will be prioritized and a resolution plan developed per the priority (i.e.,

Priority A is 30 days and Priority B 60 days).

With both units shutdown, management with operations input has identified a number a material condition items which will be corrected prior to start-up. ,

This, along with the extensive work being completed during Unit 1 and Unit 2 t outages, and the change of standt.rds will result in improvement in plant material condition.

4

Correct Processes That Challence Safe Plant Operation: To minimize human performance errors, plant labeling is being upgraded to support operators and other station personnelin the safe completion of operations and maintenance activities. At a recent action plan progress meeting, the labeling plan Team Leader indicated that three milestone dates had not been met. This was in part due to a failure to schedule and obtain support from other departments and is indicative of the need for continued emphasis on enforcing management expectations. Senior management is taking these opportunities to reinforce accountability and to modify individual behaviors to ensure expectations are being met. In this case, Maintenance and Stores committed the needed resources to assist in bringing the labeling plan back on schedule.

Maintenance Several initiatives are ongoing in the maintenance area to address worker performance. Using specific criteria, weekly field observations of workers are being performed by First Line Supervisors to ensure expectations are known and accountability is pushed down to the worker level. Pre-job briefings and job turnovers have been standardized to reduce the risk of human performan::e errors in these processes. A review of the mairitenance training programs is in prngress to address current skill and knowledge-based deficiencies in the maintenance areas.

Examples of maintenance involvement in the LaSalle Upgraded 1996 Operational Plan include the following elements directed at short-term improvements:

Reduce Maintenance Rework: Reducing maintenance rework will help LaSalle Station achieve more effective work management. We have reviewed data bases for rework, identified the major contributors and analyzed those to reveal the underlying causes of rework at LaSalle. The analysis showed both skill-based errors (e.g. ineffective implementation of self-check and procedure adherence) and knowledge-based errors (e.g.,

knowledge weaknesses in pumps for mechanics, motors for electricians, and the EHC system for instrument techs). Corrective actions have been determined t' address these and include enhanced training and additional management monitoring of activities associated with pumps, motors and EHC during L2R07 and L1F35. Increased worker involvement through meetings and informal discussions is underway to improve identification of maintenance issues, such as rework, through the PIF process. Maintenance initiated PIFs have increased (43 in August,79 in September,354 in October, and 118 through November 18).

5

l O

improve Work Execution: The work priorities of the Fix-It-Now (FIN) Team I have been realigned to focus on emergent equipment problems, such as l l Main Control Room distractions, which challenge the operators. Twenty-one l ARs/WRs have been identified that are within FIN Team capability. Six have l been resolved and the other fifteen are scheduled for completion by l December 31,1996. We are also increasing FIN work that is classified i emergent priority work. By this, we will gain quicker tum around on minor maintenance and proV.de a level of protection for scheduled work. We are j l

on schedule to achieve a goal of having the percentage of FIN Team work that is higher priority increased from 20% to 40%.

Enaineerina As discussed during our SALP meeting, the new engineering management team has observed deficiencies in engineering consistent with those cited in the SALP 13 report. We have put in place several stop gap measures to immediately improve the technical quality and content of selected Engineering products.

For example, we have implemented formal Department Head review and approval of engineering work products including Problem Identification Form issues, significant safety evaluations and operability evaluations, technical specification clarifications, significant root cause determinations and formal regulatory responses. This action willimprove work product quality.

An Independent Review Group for Safety Evaluations and Operability Evaluations was established. This function will transition to be part of an i Engineering Assurance Group which has a broader in-line and overview function. The Engineering Assurance Group is led by an industry leader in engineering assurance and will include personnel with long term, broad .

I experience in engineering and engineering processes.

Examples of engineering involvement in the LaSalle Upgraded 1996 Operational Plan includes the following elements directed at short-term improvements in the area of Effective Plant Support:  ;

Improve Root Cause identification and Corrective Action Determination:

A Corrective Action Review Board (CARB) has been implemented to review root cause reports for adequacy and appropriateness of corrective actions.

CARB has raised the standards for rigorous root cause analyses as indicated by numerous requests for supplemental information and/or analysis prior to acceptance. Actions are also in place to push the accountability for root cause analysis quality down from the CARB to the responsible line manager. These actions are expected to increase l management involvement and thus improve the capability of the staff to conduct root cause analyses and will reduce the frequency of repeat events.

6

Implement Short-Term Actions to Assess and Improve Conformance to the Desian Basis: These activities include performing System Functional Performance Reviews for selected systems, as part of longer term reviews for a!! systems important to safe and reliable operation. This will better I

establish the detailed functional requirements, prioritize known and latent l system problems, and confirm the adequacy of periodic testing for l monitoring .Snctional performance. Five systems have been selected for completing these reviews prior to startup of LaSalle Units 1 and 2 (Main Control Room Ventilation / Auxiliary Electric Equipment Room Ventilation; i Core Standby Cooling (essential service water); 125 VDC (Div i and II);

Reactor Core isolation Cooling; Electrohydraulic Control). Additionally, detailed design reviews are being conducted for the first three of these systems, which will confirm the design adequacy compared to the design basis requirements via detailed review of design and analyticalinformation.

Industry personnel with extensive experience in nuclear facilities are leading the reviews and are coaching and tutoring LaSalle engineers in these processes.

As I mentioned eertier, the third step in our approach to improvement is to put in place the processes to maintain improvements achieved. Extensive effort has been exerted to upgrade LaSalle Station's ability to identify its own problems. Each Department Head is required to conduct a self-assessment of their area and meet wie the Station Manager and Site Vice President to discuss problems and corrective actions being taken. Specif'c areas required to be discussed include personnel performance and training.

Follow up in subsequent sessions is being used to hold Department Heads accountable for making improvements. Also, the Management Review Board is being reconstituted and refocused to provide move effective assessment. Groups outside of LaSalle Station are also being used more frequently to provide objective assessments of site activities. Assessments of this nature include one on inservice testing activities and two related to SOV activities.

Finally, we appreciate your acknowledgment of improvement in Radiation Protection; however, we are not satisfied with our performance in this area.

Management field observations have been increased as part of the effort to improve this area. We are also working to effect improvements in Security, which declined, and Fire Protection where performance continued at only an acceptable level.

Although I believe we know the full range of performance issues that face LaSalle, an Independent Self Assessment (ISA) has been initiated for LaSalle Station. The purpose of the ISA is to revalidate known performance weaknesses at LaSalle, identify new issues and identify why past efforts to 7

improve performance have been ineffective. A team of utility peers and )

INPO assessors has been assembled to perform the assessment and will be on-site at LaSalle from December 3 to December 13. I will share the results of this independent Self Assessment with you.

We will update our Operational Plan for the first part of 1997. As we l complete this effort, we will continue to share this plan with the NRC l Resident inspectors. I hope to meet with you early in 1997 to discuss LaSalle's performance and will contact your office to set up a meeting.

It is critical through our efforts that we achieve improved human performance I

and plant material condition. As indicated above, our focus is on results rather than activities. In closing, we believe that we understand our l performance issues and have the determination to improve through the ,

efforts described above. If you have questions regarding the information  !

provided, please contact me at 815 357-6761 Ext. 3600.

Respectfully, I

M W. T. Subalusky  !

Site Vice President LaSalle County Station ec: A. B. Beach, NRC Region til Administrator M. P. Huber, NRC Senior Resident inspector - LaSalle D. M. Skay, Project Manager - NRR - LaSalle F. Niziolek, Office of Nuclear Facility Safety - lDNS DCD - Licensing (Hardcopy: Electronic: )

Central File 1

l l

8

l i

i *

-l e a

December 18. 1996 PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION OF EVENT OR UNUSUAL OCCURRENCE PNO-III-96-074 This preliminary notification constitutes EARLY notice of events of POSSIBLE safety or public interest significance. The information is as initially received without verification or evaluation and is basically all that is known by Region III staff (Lisle. Illinois) on this date.

r

' Facility Licensee Emergency Cl "sification Commonwealth Edison Co. Notification of Unux ., Event La Salle 1 2 Alert Marseilles. Illinois Site Area Emergency Dockets: 50-373.50-374 General Emergency X Not Applicable

Subject:

OUTAGES EXTENDED TO ADDRESS OPERATIONAL AND DESIGN ISSUES On December 13. 1996, the licensee informed NRC Region III (Chicago) that it planned to extend the outages for both LaSalle units to address operational and design engineering issues identified during an Independent Self Assessment (ISA) initiated by the licensee. Unit I was shut down September 22 to repair a turbine control valve and the outage was extended to evaluate several engineering issues. Unit 2 was shut down September 20 for refueling. The scheduled startup dates for Unit 1 and Unit 2 are currently ~ ary 30 and February 21. 1996. respectively.

The licensee's ISA was performed by a team of about 20 persons. including consultants. staff members from other utilities, and representatives from the Institute for Nuclear Power Operations (INPO). The assessment team presented its preliminary findings to the licensee on December 13. The final team report will be competed in mid-January.

The ISA team identified several common themes in the areas of Operations. )

Maintenance, and Engineering. The team also raised some concerns in the area of plant support.

The licensee is developing a startup plan to address both the issues i identified by the ISA team and other design and operational issues identified earlier in the outage. Once the startup plan has been prepared, the licensee will determine the additional outage time needed  ;

, to complete the plan activities and project new startup dates accordingly.

The State of Illinois will be informed. The information in this preliminary notification has been reviewed with licensee management.

Region III received initial information on the decision to extend the

, outages on December 13 with additional information obtained on December 4 17. This information is current as of 1 p.m. on December 17, 1996.

4

Contact:

MARC DAPAS JIM CALDWELL j (630)829-9628 (630)829-9600 i if.122000VO 961218 R PDR I8 E ,

. PNO-III-96-074 PDR o'-

l 6.N '

of

'. ( onmiotmr.ilth 1.alison 4.ompam p} ,,

• 1 1 twalle t.cncrating %I.ition LJ 'J i

- A U

) Isti \ortli .'t t Ro.it!

e kir cilic 11 ol 4 a 14'r

, m m 4n, ni l

( .' .'  :.

December 30,1996 ,j. "

• 2- -

.. m ._____

Mr. A. Bill Beach .

Regional Administrator .

- -i -

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission .

~

801 Warrenville Road '2" Lisle,IL 60532-4351

Dear Mr. Beach:

1 This letter is to inform you of the actions that will be taken to address key  !

problem areas and accelerate the rate of performance improvement at I LaSalle County Station.

During the period December 3 through December 13,1996, an independent industry Safety Assessment (ISA) team conducted a comprehensive review of the performance at the LaSalle County Nuclear Station. This assessment, done at the request of Comed, was conducted by a team of industry peers, and included representatives of the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations. The team noted a number of deficiencies in the areas of Operations, Engineering, and overall Management. This assessment confirmed the deficiencies identified earlier in the Service Water Sealant injection Event in June,1996, the Service Water System inspection conducted by the NRC on September 3-24,1996, and the SALP 13 report of October 17,1996. The ISA team provided valuablo insight into these issues, along with a number of suggestions for addressing them. We are planning to brief you and your staff on the results of the ISA in a public meeting on January 9,1997.

As you may recall, I made a strong statement at the SALP meeting on October 29,1996, that the LaSalle nuclear units would not be started up before we were ready to conduct the start up and subsequent operations in a safe and reliable manner. In keeping with tha1 philosophy, and in consideration of the additional insight provided by the ISA team, I have canceled the start up dates of the units, and directed development of a restart plan that will address the following four major areas: safe plant ,()

operation, effective work management, engineering support of the plant and

,- g g gonfiguration control, and effective human interaction and performance.

4701000177 961230 PDR ADOCK 05000373#

P PDR 'dt,N ( a ,

s i n.s om comp.im ,

g

~

i i

This plan will include actions such as: intensive retraining of the Operators, design and functional reviews of selected plant systems, as well as upgrading a wide range of operations, engineering and work management activities. The development of this plan will define the actions needed for the restart of the units, and until these times are determined and the plan developed, the start up dates of the units will remain indeterminate. A copy of this restart plan will be provided to you as soon as it is developed.

If there are any questions or comments conceming this letter, please refer them to me at (815) 357-6761, extension 3600.

Respectfully, W. T. Subalusky Site Vice President LaSalle County Station cc: M. P. Hubar, NRC Senior Resident inspector - LaSaite D. M. Skay, Project Manager - NRR - LaSalle Central File

l o.

l 'i

- UNITED STAT 13 l

! NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D. C. 20G44 l

l l lNFORMATION REPORT 1

j December 24. 1996 SECY 96-264 l Egr: The Commissioners 1

j Erns: James L. Blaha, Assistant for Operations, Office of the EDO j Subiect: WEEKLY INFORMATION REPORT - WEEK ENDING DECEMBER 20, 1996 Contents Enclosure f

1 l Nuclear Reactor Regulation A l

Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards B 1 Nuclear Regulatory Research C

Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data D

! General Counsel E*

4 Administration F i Information Resources Management G*

l Controller H*

i Personnel I i Small Business & Civil Rights J*

Enforcement K*

l

State Programs L*

Public Affairs M

! International Programs N*

Office of the Secretary 0*

i Region I P j Region 11 P j Region III P i Region IV P l Executive Director for Operations Q*

Congressional Affairs R*

l i

)

{

• No input this week.

M a

ames L. Bla a j Assistant for Operations. OEDO 1

Contact:

4 W. Dean, OEDO j 415-1726 i

i Woa.2m M '

j NRf! FilF RENTER COPY <7c 17c y,

9 s

Region III Items of Interest Week Ending December 20, 1996 Clinton Nuclear Power Station A management meeting was held in the NRC Region III Office, Lisle, Illinois, on December 16, 1996, between NRC senior managers and Illinois Power Company senior managers to discuss and review the current status of Clinton Nuclear Power Station's Startup Readiness Action Plan. The discussion focused on three areas: operations; engineering; and nuclear assessment. In addition to the actions that will be taken prior to startup, Illinois Power Company also presented their long term improvement plan.

Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station A public meeting between the NRC staff and Commonwealth Edison managers was held onsite on December 18, 1996, to discuss the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance report. The NRC was represented by the Region III Deputy Regional Administrator William Axelson, Region !!! Director of the Division of Reactor Projects Jim Caldwell and Region and other staff members.

Dresden Nuclear Power Station A management meeting was held at the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Morris, Illinois, on December 19, 1996, between NRC senior managers and Commonwealth Edison Company senior managers. The meeting discussed Comed's progress in completing the actions outlined in the November 21, 1996, Confirmatory s tion Letter (CAL). The CAL documented NRC's concerns with Dresden's control of calculations and with the overall performance of site and corporate engineering activities.

ABB Combustion Enaineerina. Inc. Manaaement Meetina A management meeting was held in the Region III Office, Lisle, Illinois, on December 18, 1996, between NRC Region III senior managers and ABB Combustion Engineering, Inc., senior managers. The meeting discussion focused on the status of the licensee's Plant Improvement Program. This program is a comprehensive corrective action plan which addresses the findings of NRC's Augmented Inspection Team and the licensee's investigation into the August 22, 1996, chemical reaction event.

DECEMBER 20, 1996 ENCLOSURE P

1 i 'if 1

l

• j January 2. 1997 SECY 97 -001 fat: The Commissioners from:

4 James L. Blaha, Assistant for Operations, Office of the EDCI l Subiect: WEEKLY INFORMATION REPORT - WEEK ENDING DECEMBER 27, 1996 l

l Contents Enclosure Nuclear Reactor Regulation A*

i Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards B Nuclear Regulatory Research C*

Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data D General Counsel E*

Administration F Information Resources Management G*  !

j Controller H*

Personnel 1*

i i

Small Business & Civil Rights J*

Enforcement K*

! State Programs L*

1 i

Public Affairs M International Programs N*

] Office of the Secretary 0*

i Region I P

! Region 11 P*

i Region III P Region IV i P*

Executive Director for Operations Q*

j Congressional Affairs

! R*

1 l *No input this week.

1 i

Original signed by:

j

~ ._R701470H+-470M2 -

l PDR COMMS NRCC James L. Blaha WEEKLYINFOREPT PDF<

Assistant for Operations, OEDO

Contact:

B. McCabe, OED0 ,

415-1721 L, j

Document Name: C:\WEEKD27.

l 47 4

} og*d," g NnC RLE CENTER COPY

{' l l[J97 [ l)-P)7 y p L'~lA

{

.. . . . -e e ,

k oP14 6,

w-~

) . _.....-

i i e i

j Region 111 l Items of Interest l Week Ending December 27, 1995 LaSalle and Zion Nuclear Power Stations OnDecember23,199y, Region!!!RegionalAdministratorA.BillBeachand members of the Region 111 staff met with Comed Chief Nuclear Operating Officer Harold Keiser, Co...:d Senior Vice President for Nuclear Operations Thomas j Maiman, and members of the Comed staff to discuss the findings of Comed's i Independent Self Assessment (ISA) Team at LaSalle and Zion Nuclear Power l Stations. ISA Team members presented the team's findings in the areas of '

Engineering, Operations, Organization and Management. Among the items noted I by the ISA were: a short term focus in Engineering; instances of unauthorized i

design changes; concerns with configuration management and the understanding

} design and licensing requirements; ineffective work management; and j ineffective training.

Following the ISA presentation, Comed delineated plans for in.provement that i included keeping both LaSalle units shut down until the 3bility to operate j properly had been sufficiently demonstrated.

I i Advanced Medical Systems. Inc. - Cleveland. Ohio i

i On December 27, 1996, the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District announced it j had reached a settlement with Advanced Medical Systems, Inc., (AMS) in its

lawsuit resulting from the discovery in 1991 of cobalt-60 contamination in i sewage sludge ash at the sewer district's Southerly Wastewater Treatment j Plant. In 1994 the sewer district had terminated sewer service for the AMS 2

facility in Clevaland. The sewer district brot;ht the lawsuit to recover the l costs associated with the containment and control of the sludge ash ponds at  ;

, the treatment plant. Under the terms of '.he settlement, AMS and associated I

! businesses will pay $1.25 million to the sewer district. The lawsuit in U.S.

j District Court has been dismissed with no admission of liability of any party. {

i l The settlement agreement establishes conditions to be met by AMS before it may j be reconnected to the sewer system. AMS is also permitted to discharge about

! 100,000 gallons of water stored at its facility if the water contains less than 100 picoturies per liter of only soluble cobalt-60.

1 ,

i i

i 4

I DECEMBER 27, 1996 ENCLOSURE P

_i _ __. _ -