ML20141B080
| ML20141B080 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 03/24/1986 |
| From: | Stern S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Johnson E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8604040621 | |
| Download: ML20141B080 (18) | |
Text
ERR 24 m i
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Eric Johnson, Director Division of Reactor Safety and Projects, Region IV l
THROUGH:
Robert Bernero, Director Division of BWR Licensing, NRR Walter R. Butler, Director BWR Project Directorate No. 4, NRR FROM:
Stephen M. Stern, Project Manager BWR Project Directorate No. 4, NRR
SUBJECT:
NRR INPUT FOR SALI' REPORT FOR RIVER BEND STATION l
Enclosed is the NRR SALP report for the Gulf States Utilities (River Bend Station) for the period January 1,1985 until January 31, 1986. The report is based on SALP inputs provided by technical review personnel and the assessments made by the Project manager. The overall performance rating fa be functional area of Licensing Activities is Category 2.
In addition, we have provided a sumary assessment of certain other functional areas to the extent of our involvement in those areas.
Ddenalawned by Stephen M. Stern, Project Manager BWP Project Directorate No. 4, NRR
Enclosure:
H. Denton D. Eisenhut G. Holahan D. Vassallo J. Jaudon D. Chamberlain
,, Distr.ibu tion EDocket fil$
8604040621 860324 NRC PDR PDR ADOCK O*000459 G
Local PDR PDR PD#4 Rdg SStern EHylton PD#4/P PD#4/D
.01 '
NR (W
l fjffern~e' 3/2tf/86 3/A/86 f3'$ tton SSter 1
WButler r
/t,y/86 U3/,ty/86
p aru
'o UNITED STATES g
[
p, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION E
j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%*....*'p N 24 g6 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Eric Johnson, Director Division of Reactor Safety and Projects, Region IV THROUGH:
Robert Bernero, Director Division of BWR Licensing, NRR l
Walter R. Butler, Director BWR Project Directorate No. 4, NRR FROM:
Stephesi M. Stern, Project Manager BWR Project Directorate No. 4, NRR
SUBJECT:
NRR INPUT FOR SALP REPORT FOR RIVER BEND STATION Enclosed is the NRR SALP report for the Gulf States Utilities (River Bend Station) for the period January 1,1985 until January 31, 1986. The report is based on SALP inputs provided by technical review personnel and the assessments made by the Project manager. The overall performance rating in the functional area of Licensing Activities is Category 2.
In addition, we have provided a sumary assessment of certain other functional areas to the extent of our involvement in those areas.
1 ep e M. St roject Maneger WR Pr ject Directorate No. 4, NRR
Enclosure:
H. Denton D. Eisenhut G. Holahan D. Vassallo J. Jaudon D. Chamberlain
l Docket No. 50-458 l
FACILITY:
River Bend Station LICENSEt:
Gulf States Utilities EVALVATIrj.1 PERIOD: January 1, 1985 to January 31, 1986 PROJECT MANAGER:
Stephen M. Stern I.
INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of the evaluation of the performance of Gulf States Utilities (GSU), the licensee and applicant for the River Bend Station, in the functional area of Licensing Activities.
The approach used in this evaluation is consistent with the provisions of NRR Office Letter No. 44, NRR Inputs to SALP Process, dated January 3, 1984, which requires that each organization responsible for preparing a Safety Evaluation provide a SALP input upon completion of the evaluation. The staff has applied the SALP evaluation criteria for the performance attributes based on first hand experience with the licensee or with the licensee's submittals.
The individual SALP evaluations for each rated issue were assembled into a matrix (seeAppendixA). Those data were then used, with apprnpriate weighting factors for the importance to safety of the licensing issue, to develop the over-all evaluation of the licensee's performance. The assessments for the individual ratings were also tempered with judgment regarding the appropriateness of the rating for the specific licensing issue.
Thi3 ap' roach is consistent with NRC Manual Chapter 0516, which specifies that p
each functional area evaluated will be assigned a perfomance category based on a composite of a number of attributes.
II.
SUMMARY
OF RESULTS The licensee has, in general, continued the high level of performance of the previous two SALP evaluations in the Licensing Activities area. There were a few exceptions to this general high level of performance; specifically, continued last minute changes in plant design, evidenced by two rather large FSAR amendments in the few weeks imediately preceding low power license issuance complicated the staff's task to perform an integrated safety review of the plant design. However, the licensee's response to staff inquiries on the impact of these changes was responsive, comprehensive and technically sound in most instances.
Overall, the licensee's strcngest point is management. The licensee proposed and the staff agreed (in part) to proposals to issue the low power operating license prior to completion of certain selected construction and test items.
The staff was satisfied with the procedures implemented by the licensee to manage the list of construction and test completion items.
In fact, the NRC Commissioners recomended that the management practices employed at River Bend w
w
- for managing work queues be considered for possible application to other plants.
A weak point may be in the area of monitoring and implementing lessons learned from others in the instrumentation and control area.
Based on the assessment approach described in the Introduction, the licensee's performance in the functional area of Licensing Activities is rated Category 2.
III. CRITERIA The seven evaluation criteria as given in NRC Manual Chapter 0516 (Table 1) were used in this assessment.
In addition, housekeeping in and around the plant is also discussed. These criteria are as follows:
A.
Management involvement in assuring quality B.
Approach to resolution of technical issues from a safety standpoint C.
Responsiveness to NRC initiatives D.
Enforcement History
- E.
Staffing (includingmanagement)*
F.
Reporting and analysis of reportable events G.
Training qualification and effectiveness
- H.
Housekeeping
- IV. PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS The licensee's performance for the Licensing Activities functional area was evaluated for four of the eight criteria listed above. The data base of experience in this rating period for the remaining four criteria (asterisked above) was much smaller than for the other four criteria and therefore, only a summary comment is provided for those criteria.
This performance a:sessment is based on the staff's evaluation of the licensee's performance in support of licensing actions which had a significant level of activity during the assessment period. These actions included preparation of four supplements to the SER, low power licensing, meeting with the ACRS, pre-sentations in support of the proposed full power license for the Consnission, and operation of the plant during the startup testing program throughout half of the rating period. An extensive effort was required by the staff and the licensee to support these actions during the rating period. Those actions which were explicitly identified as completed licensing actions and reported inSERsupplementsarelistedbelou(92 actions):
OUTSTANDING LICENSING ISSUES RESOLVED DURING SALP PERIOD 1.
Moderate-energy line break (ASB)1 2.
High-enerqylinebreak(ASB) valve leakage) program (including RCS pressure boundary Inservice test 3.
(MEB) 4.
Seismic and dynamic qualification of equipment (EQB)
I NRR review branch prior to 11/85.
. OUTSTANDING LICENSING ISSUES RESOLVED DURING SALP PERIOD (cont'd.)
)
i 5.
Environmental qualification of equipment (EQB) 6.
Preservice inspection program (MTEB) 7.
Containment loads (CSB) 8.
ECCS LOCA analysis (II.K.3.31) (RSB) 9.
Bypassed and inoperable status (ICSB)
- 10. Emergency diesel generators electrical loads (PSB)
- 11. Qualification of TDI diesel generators (TDI Task Force)
- 12. Auxili&ry support systems (PSB)
- 13. Submergence of electrical equipment (PSB)
- 14. Heavy-loads handling system (ASB)
- 15. Safe / alternate shutdown (CHEB)
- 16. Communications systems (PSB) l
- 17. Lighting systems (PSB)
- 18. HPCS diesel generator (PSB)
- 19. Fuel oil storage (PSB)
- 20. Separation of electric circuits (PSB)
- 21. Safety parameter display system (HFEB)
- 22. Control room survey (HFEB)
- 23. Resolution of HEDs (HFEB)
- 24. Standby service water system (ASB)
- 25. Standby liquid control system (ASB)
- 26. Low-pressure interface leakage (ASB)
- 27. Equipment and floor drains (ASB)
- 28. Control building ventilation (ASB)
- 29. Miscellaneous HVAC systems (ASB)
- 30.. Starting voltage for Class IE motors (PSB)
- 31. Hydrogen control - degraded core accident (CSB)
CONFIRMATORY LICENSING ISSUES RESOLVED DURING SALP PERIOD 1.
West Creek sediment removal (CHEB)I 2.
Slope stability (SGEB) 3.
Pipe failure modes and check valve stress analysis (MEB) 4.
Annulus pressurization (MEB) 5.
Thermal and anchor displacement loads (MEB) 6.
Fuel rod mecha-ical fracturing (CPB) 7.
Fuel assembly structural damage (CPB) 8.
LOCTVS/ CONTEMPT-LT 28 computer codes (CSB) 9.
Reactor vessel cooldown rate (CSB)
- 10. SRV discharge testing (CSB)
- 11. Mark III-rated issues (CSB)
- 12. Containment repressurization (CSB)
- 13. Containment purge valves (EQB)
INRR review branch prior to 11/85.
l
' CONFIRMATORY LICENSING ISSUES RESOLVED DURING SALP PERIOD (cont'd.)
- 14. PVLCS leakage (CSB)
- 15. Electrical and instrumentation and control diagrams (ICSB)
- 16. Routing of circuits and sensors (ICSB) 17.
Instrumentation setpoints (ICSB)
- 18. RPS power supply protection (ICSB)
Isolation devices (ICSB)
- 21. Reactormodeswitch(ICSB)
- 22. ADS actuation (ICSB)
- 23. ESF reset controls (ICSB) 24.
Initiation of ESF support systems (ICSB) 25.
Instrumentation of ESF support systems (ICSB)
- 26. RCIC system (ICSB)
- 27. Standby liquid control system (SLCS) (ICSB)
- 28. Postaccident monitoring instrumentation (ICSB)
- 29. Temperature effects on level measurements (ICSB)
- 30. High/ low pressure interlocks (ICSB)
NMS and RCIS isolation (ICSB) p trip (ICSB)
End of cycle recirculation pum 31.
32.
- 33. Rod pattern control system (ICSB)
- 34. DRMS(ICSB)
- 35. High-energy line break control system failures (ICSB)
- 36. Multiple control system failures (ICSB)
- 37. Emergency Response Information System (ERIS) (ICSB)
- 38. LPCS/RHR A pump procedures (PSB)
- 39. EPA /RPS motor generator set interconnection (PSB)
- 40. Second level undervoltage protection relay setpoint (PSB)
- 41. Safety cable idertification (PSB)
- 42. Non-Class 1E loads - powered from Class IE power supplied (PSB)
- 43. Postaccident sampling system (CMEB)
~
- 44. Diesel generators - mechanical issues (PSB)
- 45. TMI Item II.F.1, Attachment 2 (METB)
- 48. TMI Item I.C.1 (PSRB) 1 49.
Initial test program revisions (PSRB)
- 50. Proper ESF function (II.K.1.5) (PSRB}
- 51. Ultimate heat sink with delayed fan ' start (ASB)
- 52. Participation of human factors specialists in detailed control room design review (HFEB)
- 53. Task analysis documentation (HFEB) 1
- 54. Control room modifications (HFEB)
- 55. Containment vanting procedures (PSRB)
- 56. Monitoring instruments for HPCS 125-V ac system (PSB)
- 57. Prote: tion for lighting penetration circuits (PSB)
- 58. Protass Control Program (METB)
- 59. Subcompartmentpressureanalysis(CSB)
- 60. Cable derating (PSB)
- 61. Equipmentqualification-cudit(EQB)
i A.
Management Invo_lvement and Control in Assuring, Quality The licensee's management participated directly in almost all of the major licensing activities addressed in this report, Notable examples l
of the contributions that resu Rad from this management involvement are
{
summarized below:
)
The Senior Vice President - River Bend Nuclear Group and the plant manager were directly involved in the headquarters management review
.)
of the status on construction and test completion (March 26,1086),
and the site visit by the Director, NRR and staff on readiness for 1
licensing (May 13-14,1986).
i The Commissior.trs commended Gulf States Utilities (GSU) for its innovative practices for managing the queue of remaining construc-tion activities during the latter stages of licensing and early j
stages of low power startup.
l Furthermore, the N3C Commissioners commended GSU for its c0munica-i tions with the Comissioners, themselves, over their accelerated i
approach to completion of licemsing.
In January 1986, the staff had some concerns over the number of reportable events, scrams and LERs during the River Bend startup.
The staff was impressed with the innovative programs instituted by GSU to prioritize activities and focus resources on problem areas.
In particular, the staff was impressed with direct senior management (vice presidential level) involvement in these problem i
i area remediation activities.
I Furthermore, GSU has displayed a corporate commitment to resolution of issues through participation in various licensee review groups and owrars i
groups. The staff views this approach as indicative of a positive atti-tude towards management involvement and control in licensing activities.
i i
In a few instances, notably outstanding licensing issues number 4, 5, and l
10 listed in item IV above, the staff raised concerns to GSU senior management over delays in resolution.
GSU senior management became directly involved and mutually satisfactory resolutions of these issues were developed and implemented.
Based on the above detailed observations, GSU is rated Category 1 for this attribute.
l B.
Approach to Resolution of Technical Issues From a Safety Standpoint Responses to NRC inquiries by GSU have been general y viable with technically sound, conservative and thorough approaches in almost all cases. The applfcant has demonstrated a clear understanding of most i
technical issues involved in many review areas including containment i
systems, power systems,'and instrumentation and control. GSU was willing to perform additional studies, as necessary, to resolve technical issues.
1 1
- However, in several areas, particularly outstanding licensing issues number 3, 4,15 and 31, the staff questioned the licensec's lack of i
understanding of the technical issues involved or the depth of their technical responses.,
)
While GSU is aggressive in resolving many safety issues, the staff feels that the utility has relied excessively on its Architect-Engineer for technical responses. Additionally, the staff is of the opinion that GSU tends to be more concerned in many instances with cost rather than takirj tha mbre conserystive approaches to issue resolution.
On the basis of the above observations, GSU is rated Category 2 in this area.
C.
Responsiveness to NRC Initiatives 4
GSU proposed an accelerated licensing schedule, which involved the resolution of a large number of open licensing items (see Part IV) during the latter phases of licensing. This accelerated licensing schedule was ca.mplicated by GSU's desire for a low power license while several con-struction and test items remained to be completed.
Given the potential complexities of the " tight" review schedule, GSU performed very well indeed. GSU demonstrated an aggressive attitude in the resolution of many issues, requesting conference calls and meetings which were promptly followed up with submittals or responses. Responses were generally technically sound and addressed staff concerns. However, several submittals, particularly those for outstanding items 4, S, 6 and
,31 either required frequent slippages in schedules or were late.
Of particular concern was the submission of yoluminous last minuto amend-ments to the FSAR in the weeks preceding the low power licensing. While most of these FSAR amendme.a.ts reflected previous docketed commitments, there was sufficient new material in these to complicate the staff's tight review schedule.
i On the basis of these observations, considering the compressed licensing schedule, a rating of Category 2 is appropriate for this crea.
1 D.
Enforcement History i
No basis for rating in this area.
E.
Staffing The comments in this area are based on the Project Mnager's observations during the rating period.
~
i-l j Positions wittiin GSU's organization are identified and authorities and responsibilities well defined. GSU licensing and engineering groups i
appear to be well staffed as indicated by representatives present at review meetings and site groups. During licensing, GSU consistently had staff available to discuss review items.
)
NRR's principal involvement with staffing issues during the review period involved the issues of engineering expertise or stdft. On this topic, the licensee was faced by a change in Conunission policy during the period j
~
between low. power and full power licensing. Licensee management and the staff negotiated a phased resolution on shift staffing which was accept-able to the Connissioners.
)
Accordingly, the staffing attribute at River Bend is rated Category 1.
F.
R portjmod Analysis of Reportable Events J
)
4 GSU received its low power operating license for the River Bend station on August 20, 1985, and their full poper operating license on November 2A, 1985. This evaluation covet-s the low pow 6r license period and fuM power i
license period through Jonvary 31, 1986. During this five month period, the licensee reported 95 non-security events;. Approximately 10% of these events do not appear to be reportable. Approximately phe half of 1
the events are associated with isolation of the Reactor % ter Cleanup J
3 System or Residual Heat Removal System due to personnel error or leakage 4
j detection system temperature switch module malfunctions. Corrective i
measures instituted by the licensee educed the number of events con-siderably during the month of January.
.None of the reported events was considered individually significant anough to warrant detailed staff followup. The above average number 1
i of events overall, howe'cer, prompted staff attention and a site visit January 28-30, to discuss RBS operating experience. The events that were most safety significant were the loss of offsite power, feedwater system problems, and va M operator bolting inadequacies (may be 4
generic). Operator errors in general including the RHR isolations, l
are also a con;ern. The number of such events appears to be decreasing, j
based on a review 07 the January reports.
]
P.BS experienced 7 reactor scrams during the evaluation period. This number is not abnormal for a new plant, but is higher than the averege j
frequency of 8i.9 scrams / plant / year, All equipment operated normally l
following each scr:hm, l
l The majority of the events appear to have been reported promptly and
{
accurately.
4 i
Based on these evaluations, the number and sepetition of reportable
{
events, and the reactor scrahi exper.ience, we reconnend a rating of Category 3 for the licensee's performance in frequency, reporting, 4
i and analysis of reportable events.
t
G.
Training and Qualification Effectiveness No basis far rating in this area.
H.
Housekeepina During the rating period the licensee was completing an accelerated construction program. Based on the observations of the Project Manager during four site visits during this period, the licensee made great strides in cleaning up the plant prior to the commence-ment of fuel loading and has maintained a satisfactory level of 1
cleanliness since that time.
(Insufficient basis for rating in thiscategory.)
i 6
l j
i i
APPENDIX A SALP EVALUATION MATRIX Management Resolution Respon-Training Review Involvement of. Issues-siveness Qualif'ctn Branch
& Control (Safety) to NRC Staffing Effect'vns Oth.er
~
ASB 3
2 2
l CSB 1
2 3
CPB 1
2 1
RSB 2
2 2
METB 2
2 2
ICSB 1
1 MB 1
1 1
PSB 2
3 TDI T.F 2
2 2
EHEB 2
2 2
EQB 2
3 2
4 l
MEB 2
3 1
CHEB 1
1 2
PSRB 2
2 2
HFEB 1
2 2
4 l
- Insufficient basis for evaluation j
7
4 APPENDIX B - NRR Supporting Data and Sumary 1.
NRR/ Licensee _ Meetings (for low power license)
Discuss River Bend Technical Specifications January 29, 1985 Discuss findings of Equipment Qualification Audit.
January 31, 1985 Team February 14, 1985 _ Brief incoming Director of DL on status of River Bend Station February 25, 1985 - Review security plan implemetation at River Bend February 20-21, 1985 - Review documentation and hardware for standby Emergency Diesel Generators at River Bend Station February 27-28, 1985 - Review Power Systems implementation items at River Bend March 8, 1985 Technical Specifications for River Bend March 14, 1985 ! Technical Specifications for River Bend March 26, 1985 - Management Review April 3, 1985 - Diesel Generators for River Bend Station April 4, 1985 - Technical Specifications for River Bend Statica April 24, 1985 - Technical Specifications and Diesel Generators for River Bend Station April 26, 1985 - Diesel Generators for River Bend Station May 10, 1985
- Discussion on possible GSU initiative to lessen emergency electrical loads on TDI diesel generators May 13, 1985
- Management discussion of the status of River Bend Station readiness July 2, 1985
- Discussion of the impact of FSAR Amendment #20 on the SER July 12, 1985 - One time exception to Technical Specifications to allow use of drywell purge and vent system during modes 2 and 3 Ju'ly 22,1985 - Gne time exception to Technical Specifications to allcw ese of drywell purge and vent system during inodes 2 and 3 July 31, 1985 - Staff comm6nts on hydrogen control-degraded core for River Ber/l Stat. ion 2.
Comission Briefings November 15, 1985 Consideration of Isstence of Full Power License 3.
Schedular Extensions Granted a)
Low P6wer License Conditic q (hPF-40, Issued 8/29/85) 1.
Turbine Systems maintenance progran - submit by October 26 1987 f
2.
Seistic and Dynamic qualification of seismic category 1 mechanical and electrical equipment:
- modify hydraulic c6ntrol units by May 15, 1985
- seismic qualification of the ir-vessel racks prior to use.
- 3.
Equipmentqualification(environmental)-byNovember 30, 1985.
4.
Mark III containment issues - prior to startup following first i
refueling outage.
Inservice Inspection Program - submit for review a d approval by August 29, 1986.
6.
Bypassed and inoperable status indication - implement system modifications prior to startup following first refueling outage.
7.
TDI die'sel engines - final approval of staff of the overall design review and quality revalidation program prior to operation beyond the first refueling outage.
i l
B.
TDI diesel engines - reduce maximum emergency service load prior to exceed 5% rated power.
9.
Ultimate heat sink - acceptable temperature monitoring syster prior to startup following first refueling outage.
- 10. Operating staff experience - training of advisors and shift crew prior to acheiving criticality.
- 11. Testing of the off gas system and off gas vault refrigeration system - pricr to installing the reactor head.
- 12. Fire protection system - complete trodifications pricr to
[
exceeding 5% rated power.
- 13. Radwaste systems - complete testing and place into service prior to exceeding 5% rated power.
- 14. Suppression pool valves - complete modifications prior to
)
3 exceeding 5% rated pcwer.
j~
Post-accident sampling system - complete modifications prior 15.
to exceeding 5% rated power.
- 16. Statica electric distribution voltage analyses - verify prior to completion of initial test program.
- 17. Emerger.cy lighting system - complete modifications prior to completion of initial test program.
18.
Fuel building sampling system - operational prior to the first rcfueling outage.
- 20. Safety Parameter Display System - installed and operational prior to March 31, 1986.
- 21. Emergency procedure guideline.. 'or containment venting -
submit, review and approved prior to exceeding F% rated power.
1
. 22.
Instnamentation - specified instruments must be (nodified consistent with Reg. Guide 1.97 prior to start up follow first refueling outage, b)
Full Power License Conditions (NPF-47, issued November 20,1985).
All sited above except:
1 - replaced by FSAR commitment 3 - completed 8 - completed 10 - completed 12 - completed 13 - completed 14 - completed 15 - completed 19 - completed 20 - replaced by FSAR commitment 21 - completed 4.
Exemptions Granted a) Low Pcwer License -
From GDC-2 for qualification of air operated va hes in suppression pool j
pump back system.
(SSER3) b) Full power License None 5.
License Amendments issued One request for an amendment of the low power license Technical Specifications was received during the rating period and granted on an emergency basis (see Item 6 below).
No request for ame.1dments of the full power license Technical Specifications were received during the rating oeriod.
The folicwing activities relevant to the issuance of a low power license occured:
August 1985, SER Supplement No. 2 August 1985, SER Supplement No. 3 August 29, 1985, LowPowerOperatic.) License (NPF-40) issued.
The following activities relevant to the issuance of a full power license occured:
September 1985, SER Supplement No. 4 September 11, 1985, ACR$ Subcomittee meeting September 13, 1985, ACRS meeting Noven,ber 1985, SER Supplement No. 5 November 15, 1985, Comission meeting on Full power license November 20, 1985, FullPowerLicense(NPF-47) issued.
-A-6.
Emergency Technica] Specification Changes Granted September 25, 1985; to revise Technical Specifications on transient generator voltage following a full load rejection by HPCS.-
7.
Orders Issued None 8.
NRR/ Licensee Management Conference March 26, 1985 - Briefing for the Director, NRR and staff by the appli-cant, GSU, on the overall status of construction and test completion.
l May 13-14, 1985 - Site visit by the Director, NRR and staff to evaluate readiness for operating license.
Jrn. 28-30, 1986 - Site visit by staff of NRR, IE and Region IV to review startup program.
l 1
4 l
I c
I a
i k
i
Appendix C
SUMMARY
OF PREVIOUS NRC SALP EVALUATIONS FOR RIVER BEND $TATION Previous SALP Evaluations i
Latest Previous Performance Category Performance Category Functional Area (9/1/81 to 10/31/84)
(9/1/82 to 7/31/83)
Notes A.
Soils and Founda-NotAssessed(NA)
NA 1
i tions B.
Containment and -
1 2
1 Other Safety-Related Structures C.
Piping Systems and 2
2 2
Support D.
Support Systems 2
2 1
E.
Electrical Power and 2
2 1
Supply and Distribution F.
Instrumentation and 2
2 3
Control Systems G.
Safety-Related 2
2 4
Components i
H.
Corrective Action and 1
2 1
J Reporting I.
Quality Assurance 2
2 5
(Construction)
J.
Quality Assurance 2
NA 6
(Operations)
K.
Design Control 2
1 7
L.
Preoperational Testing 2
NA 1
M.
Plant Operations 2
NA 8
N.
NA 9
0.
Radiological Controls 2
NA 10 P.
Security 2
NA 1
Q.
Training 2
NA 11 S.
Licensing 2
2 1
d
,. Notes 1.
No additional need for management attention was identified for this functional area.
2.
Additional management attention should be directed toward as-built verification and drawing resolution.
3.
Additional attention and resources may be needed to accommodate increased activity.
4.
Source inspection should be improved to support spare parts procuremert.
5.
Quality assurance personnel should provide greater surveillance of actual construction. Staff should be provided to accomplish this surveillance in addition to performing document reviews and other activities.
6.
There should be aggressive recruiting to fill positions within the QA orgar.f zation.
7.
There should be aggressive closecut of all IDI findings and monitoring of as-built verification.
8.
Evaluate completed walkthroughs of procedures in order to develop confidenca in the int.ernal procedure review and approval process.
Open permanent plant positions should be filled.
9.
Emphasis should be given to the timely correction of deficiencies identified during the emergency preparedness preoperational inspection.
(This was inspected by an NRC inspection team May 6-10, 1985.)
10.
Increased menagement attention is needed to assure that NRC identified concerns in the areas of radwaste systems, effluent releases, effluent monitoring, and transportation activities are completed.
- 11. Complete the definition of job qualifications and clearly define training and training requirements.
APPENDIX D
SUMMARY
OF PREVIOUS NRR SALP EVALUATION OF RIVER BEND STATION LICIENSING ACTIVITIES i
09/01/83 to 01/01/85 to 12/31/84 1/31/86 j
(PROPOSED)
Licensing
~
' Management 2
1 Involveinent
- Approach to Resolution of Tech Issues 2
2 1
' Responsiveness 2
2
- Enforcement History
' Reportable Events 3
l
' Staffing 1
1
' Training 1
'Houskeeping 2
'Overal) Sumary 2
2 l
1 l
i 4
'