ML20195G074

Summarizes Discussions W/Licensee During CRGR 881102-03 Visit to Plant.Util Mgt Described Licensing History,Past SALP Records & Key Issues Which Resulted in Delays & Addl Costs.Util Rept of Visit to Foreign Reactors Encl.W/O Encl

ML20195G074
Person / Time
Site:	Grand Gulf
Issue date:	11/15/1988
From:	Jordan E Committee To Review Generic Requirements
To:	Bernero R, Goldberg J, Paperiello C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III), NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS), NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
References
NUDOCS 8811230144
Download: ML20195G074 (4)

Text

-

v

'[ga

+ ara , g UNITED STATES y g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

7. . j WASHIN G TO N, D. C. 20555 k..../ November 15, 1983 MEMORANDUM FOR: Robert M. Bernero, HMSS Jack R. Goldberg, OGC Carl J. Paperiello, Rill Denwood F. Ross, RES James H. Sniezek, NRR FROM: Edward L. Jordan, Chairman Committee to Review Generic Requirements

SUMMARY

OF CRGR VISIT TO GRAND GULF This summarizes the discussions with the licensee during the Committee's visit to Grand Gulf on November 2-3, 1988.

During the meeting, utility management described their licensing history, past SALP ecords, and key issues which resulted in delays and additional costs.

These included diesel generator testing, THI-related upgrades and Appendix R.

In addition, they described some of their recent initistives to upgrade performance, such as implementation of management standards, redesign of the control room, reorganization of the Operations Department, and development of a Systems Engineering Department. They provided the Committee with a copy of a report prepared following a visit they made to West German and Swiss reactors to observe and compare outage methods. A copy of the report is attached.

During this meeting the following were noted:

1. In the area of bulletins and information notices, they frequently found the issuance to be slow. They t.lso noted that information only indirectly related to their plant is often beneficial and they have to guard against "overscreening."

2. In generic requests for information or actions, they noted that questions often arise regarding the requested actions, particularly the time for implementation, and suggested that drafts be published to obtain industry comments on implementation to assure clarity and uniform understandings.

3. They generally found NRC's team inspections, such as in the areas of maintenance and E0Ps, to be very beneficial although they are time consuming. They did recommend that an attempt be made to avoid duplica-tion with other inspections, e.g., INPO, ASME, insurance and internal, and that inspections be coordinated with plant schedules.

4. In tracking events which occur at other facilities they expressed a desire to be able to search NRC documents Oy subject.

5. They believe they would have done a better job implementing TMI-related improvements if they were undertaken over a longer time period.

3011230144 881115 6 DR ADOCK 0000

r J

l i

i

6. They stated that plant betterment items have often received a low priority in scheduling in order to address regulatory issues, but believe this is  ;

starting to change. Future outages are addressing plant initiated items.  !

In addition to meeting with utility management, the Committee met with an offshift operating crew. They were very appreciative of the opportunity to meet with the Committee. Some of the comments made by the operators were as follows: i i

1. In general, they believe that a degree requirement would put a major  ;

burden on R0s in the amount of personal time needed to complete a degree i while on-shift, taking into account the additional time needed in study l to maintain their R0 license. '

2. They believed that licensing requalification exams did not represent  !

the information needed to operate the plant, although initial  :

4 examinations seemed appropriate.  !

!' 3. They like having SPOS available and use it at the simulator, but belitve ,

they need to verify the parameters. l

4. They believe that drug testing was appropriate and strongly endorsed the '

benefits obtained from plant-specific simulators.  ;

i t The Committee toured the facility. At a wrap-up session, utility management (

representatives repeated the statements of the operating crew, that this  :

i opportunity to exchange views with the Committee was informative and very

{ much appreciated.  ;

4 If you have any changes or additional comments you wish to make, please ,

f contact Cheryl Sakenas (492-4148), i i

Edward L. Jordan, Chairman l Committee to Revie. Generic '

Requirements j f

Enclosure:

Distribution: (w/o enc.) j i As stated  : Central File. ,

POR (NRC/CRGR) t l cc w/ enclosure: CRGR CF l V. Stello CRGR SF r J. Taylor E. Jordan (w/ enc.)

T. Murley J. Heltemes (w/ enc.) I Regional Administrators J. Conran (w/ enc.)

. C. Sakenas (w/ enc.)

l *See previous copy for concurrence. [

DTE~ : AE00:CRGR^  : AE00:00 :C/ 1:AE00 :  :  :  :

NAME :CSakenas:cg : CJ temes : rdan  :  :  :

........................ ......... ...................................:.........................i DATE : 11/08/88 11/i O/88 : 11//0/88 i

6. They stated that plant betterment items usually receive a low priority in l scheduling in order to address regulatory issues, and they would like to be able to change this.

In addition to meeting with utility management, the Committee met with an offshift operating crew. They were very appreciative of the opportunity to '

meet with the Committee. Some of the comments made by the operators were as  :

follows: ,

1. In general, they believe that a degree requirement would put a major burden on R0s in the amount of personal time needed to complete a degree while on shift, taking into account the additional time needed in study e.u maintain their R0 license, i f

2. They did not believe that the present liceasing requalification exam  ;

really represents the information needed to operate the plant.

3. They like hcving SPDS available and use it at the simulator, but believe i j they need to verify the parameters. {

i The Committee toured the facility and prior to leaving the site, they utility management repr9sentatives repeated the statements of the operating crew, that  !

this type of meeting with the NRC is very beneficial to them. l

If you have any changes or additional comments you wish to make, please contact Cheryl Sakenas (492-4148).

l 1

Edward L. Jordan, Chairman Committee to Review Generic  ;

Requirements I

Enclosure:

Distribution: (w/o enc.)

i As stated Central File l POR (NRC/CRGR) l cc w/ enclosure: CRGR CF V. Stello CRGR SF ,

J. Taylor E. Jordan (w/ enc.)

T. Murley J. Heltemes (w/ enc.)

Regional Administrators J. Conran (w/ enc.)

C. Sakenas (w/ enc.)

i 0FC  : AE00:CRGR : AE00:00 :C/CRGR: AE00 :  :  :  :

............., ..........................................:.........................:...........7 NAME :CSak{pi g : CJHeltemes : ELJordan  :  :  : l OATE $11/l/88 $ 11/ /88 $11/ /88 $ $ $ $ l 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY t

F~

g U' 4 5, Document Name:

GRAND GULF SUltiARY l Requestor's ID:

GALLAGIE Author's Name:

CSakenas Document Comments:

r