ML20195G934
| ML20195G934 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/14/1999 |
| From: | Travers W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Diaz N, Dicus G, Shirley Ann Jackson, Mcgaffigan E, Merrifield J, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| M990302A, NUDOCS 9906160226 | |
| Download: ML20195G934 (14) | |
Text
Qbb-
%)
[
S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o,,
UNITED STATES 5
l WA8 HINGTON. D.C. 2055H001 June 14, 1999 MEMORANDUM TO:
Chairman Jackson i
Commissioner Dieus Commissioner Diaz Commissioner McGaffigan Commissioner Merrifield FROM:
William D. Travers M
Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
STAFF REQUIREMENTS MEMORANDUM - COMMONWEALTH EDISON PERFORMANCE OVERSIGHT PANEL TERMINATION CRITERIA (WITS 199900038)
In a Staff Requirements Memorandum (M990302A) to the Executive Director for Operations dated March 26,1999, the Commission requested further information on the criteria used by the staff for determining when performance at Commonwealth Edison's (Comed) nuclear plants has improved sufficiently to normalize NRC inspection resources and discontinue the Comed Performance Oversight Panel (CPOP). Recent inspection activities have demonstrated that overall performance at all Comed facilities has improved sufficiently to the point that the NRC can consider discontinuing the CPOP initiative. This memorandum responds to the March 26, 1999 Staff Requirements Memorandum.
The cyclical safety performan':e of Comed nuclear facilities has long concerned the NRC Commission and staff and raised questions regarding the ability of Comed to sustain improved performance at all its sites. A Comed site has been discussed at nearly all Senior Management Meetings (SMMs) held since 1986. After the January 1997 SMM, by letter dated January 27, 1997, the NRC issued a Request for Information (RFI) to Comed, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f),
for the following information:
(a)
Information explaining why the NRC should have confidence in Comed's ability to operate six nuclear stations while sustaining performance improvement at each site, and (b)
Criteria that Comed has established or plans to establish to measure performance in light of concems identified and Comed's proposed actions if those criteria are not met.
j6 Oj%,
The RFI specifically identified the followii.g apparent weaknesses that led to the poor performance at the Comed sites:
(1)
Lack of effective senior management attention and application of resources,
&[
CONTACT:
Bruce Burgess, DRP 630/829-9629 744d6 y.
s!)33 a u 9906160226 990614 b -l d-h $k M PDR ORG NE ED
/
{ (?
1 -l"
[8 / W ?f, PDR J
7m i
4 i
.(2).
Weak corporate oversight of nuclear operations, l
'(3)'
Poor problem recognition and failure to ensure lasting corrective actions, (4)
' Lack'of adequate' engineering support, and
,(5)
' An inability or reluctance to learn from experiences at Comed and other facilities.
]
By letter dated March 28,'1997, and supplemented on April 15,1997, Comed provided its l
response to the NRC RFI including 341 committed actions to improve corporate-wide i
I performance. A multi-disciplined NRC team conducted a thorough review of the Comed,
response, concluding that it provided a broadly based and reasonable set of actions that, if effectively implemented, should enhance the capability of Comed to operate, monitor, and assess its six nuclear. stations while sustaining performance improvement at each site. The results of the assessment were presented to the Commission on April 25,1997, and provided to j
Comed by latter dated May 27,1997. The Commission determined that it needed to conduct
. periodic Commission meetings with Comed and the staff established the CPOP in June 1997 to
' assess how effectively Comed was implementing its commitments for improvement. The i
specific goals for the CPOP were to provide an integrated NRC assessment of Comed nuclear safety performance, particularly focusing on whether sustained performance improvement is being achieved at each site and to !dentify inconsistencies, if any, between Comed's 1
assessment of its performance and the NRC's assessment of Comed performance based on inspection results.
By letters dated January 5,1998, and February 17,1998, Comed identified that the i
effectiveness of the original RFI commitments had been somewhat limited and cyclic q
pedormance had not been halted. Comed concluded that the criginal 341 commitments i
focused on discrete work activities rather than the broad, fundamental processes, effectiveness
. measures, and results which Comed now views as necessary to drive improvement. The letters also provided a revised response to the NRC RFI, defining the 13 Strategic Reform j
initiatives (SRis) and associated work plans to improve corporate-wide performance. By letter i
dated August 6,1998, the NRC notified Comed that the 13 SRis were considered responsive to I
the original RFI pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f). Attachment 1 provides a cross reference between the apparent weaknesses that led to poor performance at the Comed sites (specified in the NRC RFI) and the Comed SRis.
These SRis became the foundation for the Comed improvement initiatives and CPOP oversight activities. The CPOP developed and implemented a plan to inspect and review selected 4
Comed activities and products associated with the SRI work plans. The summary status of those inspections and review activities were the subject of previous Commission meetings to discuss Comed pedormance and CPOP activities. All inspection activities developed by CPOP have been completed. ' in addition, several public meetings were conducted to discuss SRI implementation, compare Comed and NRC assessments of plant performance, review Comed's development of performance indicators, assess the effectiveness of lessons learned implementation at all Comed sites, and evaluate Comed's efforts to improve corporate-wide engineering activities.
i
.3
~
At the most recent Comed Commission Meeting, on March 2,1999, both Comed and the NRC staff presentations highlighted the improved or consistent performance results at all Comed facilities. In a subsequent SRM dated March 26,1999, the Commission requested further information on the_ evaluation criteria used by the staff for determining when performance at Comed's nuclear plants has improved sufficiently to normalize NRC inspection resources and discontinue the CPOP initiative.
Termination Criteria:
Over the past two years significant benefit has been derived from the focused inspections and reviews of SRI implementation activities and the resultant candid discussions at public CPOP meetings. However, recent CPOP meetings have highlighted that implementation of the SRis are nearly complete, that performance at Comed sites has improved, and that there is little
- difference between the results of Comed and NRC assessments of performance. Based on its review of the SRis, the CPOP members concluded that the SRis were responsive to the concerns regarding cyclic performance described in the RFl.' Consequently, the CPOP members developed the following criteria for termination of CPOP activities:
(1)-
Comed has thoroughly assessed reasons for cyclic poor performance and has established a corrective action plan to address the applicable weaknesses.
i (2)
CamEd has implemented its corrective action plan, assessed its effectiveness, and j
determined that implementation is sufficient to preclude continued cyclic poor
]
performance.
j (3).
The NRC has developed and implemented an assessment plan to verify implementation of the licensee's corrective action plans.
(4).
Comed has implemented a self-assessment program with sufficient elements to identify declining performance and to take necessary actions to address any adverse trends.
(5)
Comed corporate management team is committed to achieving improved performance, provides strong leadership and oversight of all sites, and fosters a safety work ethic.
(6)-
Comed safety performance dictates a routine level of NRC oversight at all of its nuclear plants without a significant decline in performance at any plant.
(7)
CPOP has determined that the other evaluation factors (1-6) are complete and the Commission has been informed of the intent to discontinue CPOP activities.
Supplemental guidance was developed to define how the termination criteria should be applied (Attachment 2). In developing both the termination criteria and supplemental evaluation guidance, the CPOP considered the apparent weaknesses (described in the RFI) identified by the NRC staff through the SMM process as the root causes for cyclic performance at the Comed sites.
V
The'rse,uiis of the CPOP's assessment to determine if the terminatiork crit 5ria have been satisfied are provided as Attachment 3. Termination Criterion 2 remains open pending completion of a public meeting with Comed, tentatively scheduled for mid-July, to discuss whether the intemal effectiveness reviews of the SRis were successful in identifying performance trends, both positive and negative. The results of the April 1999 SMM discussions
' were presented dur!ng a Commission Meeting on May 6,1999, where the staff informed the Commission that due to performance improvement, none of the Comed sites required agency action beyond routine oversight.
==
Conclusion:==
Upon determining that Termination Criterion 2 has been satisfied, the staff intends to discontinue CPOP. activities.' Consistent with the SMM results, the staff plans on providing a routine level of inspection for the Comed sites over the next 6 months. As part of the normal Plant Performance Review (PPR) process, the staff will evaluate performance trends at each of the Comed sites, as well as conduct an integrated assessment of Comed performance. In addition to the PPR public meetings to discuss licensee performance at specific reactor facilities, the staff plans to conduct a public meeting to discuss overall Comed performance.
Attachments: 1. Commonwealth Edison Oversight Matrix l
- 2. Supplemental Guidance-Evaluation Factors for Discontinuing l
Commonwealth Edison Enhanced Oversight
- 3. Assessment of Evaluation Factors for Discontinuing Enhanced NRC Oversight in Reference to the January 27,1997,10 CFR 50.54(f) Letter cc w/atts:
M. Knapp, DEDE F. Miraglia, DEDR P. Norry, DEDM J. Blaha, AO S. Collins, NRR R. Schroll, SECY OGC CFO I
CIO OCA OlG OPA Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ACNW, ASLBP PDR DCS P1-17 4
i 1
tn s
e g
'n m
s n
e h
e e
i m
c r
v r
u i
u s
e a
t t
a c
e n
v t
t o
A i
t E
t it t
n u
c r
n n
n e
r n
n p
m m
S a
e i
e t
i w
m m
e e
i e
le m
i e
g r
w g
o g
n o
g s
tn i
f a
d a
R a
s s
e n
n v
e R
m P
a ip n
e i
e r
R a
o e
v n
e a
s s
i e
M h
M s
e c
M it s
s e
n ig d
n n
lo e
d e
d c
ig c
d d
v d
e r
e n
o a
s v
n d
n o
n o
s v
ta a
C o
a a
t r
r a
P E
P y
e t
in t
t t
r r
it c
n p
h g
e h
g e
g o
e ig t
g l
l o
e d
m ig i
L ig i
c is n
n s
h f
h S
n a
i r
n n
n b
n n
c i
s r
t s
r n
)
r G
o e
a P
i ip a
r o
n r
o r
o a
e r
r t
t e
- s t
o e
i e
e it ia e
it lp G
it a
s n
t t
i v
n n
f v
n m
O o
O c
O n
M e
v n
lp u
v
=
e s
O o
t N
o c
m s
m m
y M
a s y
M m
e m
M t
r r
(
n u
n e
pn e
e C
e E
C e
o y
x o
y p
t t
t u
e la o
A g
C n
n a
e e
t c
eio c
P s
o ig r
f f
f f
x o
n e
l n
n it lA o
S a
a a
n Dt a
c a
t g
a n
y a
e y
a ir r
a S
a o
n o
S c
r S
a r
in R
n a
e ic r
G e
t r
r s
e P
r e
r m
n o
M m
n e
a m
a a
a a
a t
r t
r e
e it e
u y
i p
a M
no w
t o
e o
lu e
h lu e
r g
e o
iO lc r
g l
n lc r
c a
a s
g m
lp ia N
P e a N
P R
N d
R N
d n
r z
s o
n lc f
t i
t t
f at c
E g
e g
i e
n m
in u
e r n u
e e
u a
h a
e ll r
e u
e n
g re P
e t
a is M
C E
T n
n OP n
n n
n a
n n
n a
o m
pl n
e c
n g
s n
n r
I r
x r
e e
E d
O B
e e
e e
h h
en h
h h
h e
h h
u e
e e
t e
e e
e e
e v
G h
n c
c c
c t
t d
t r
g e
a s
e n
n n
n g
g al g
g g
g iz t
t r
s le t
t t
t O
g g
a n
u n
e r
n n
)
e e
s ig s
is a
a a
a n
n r e n
n n
n it v
h h
h h
e e
gc e
e e
e t
n s
e n
n n
n px i
t t
t io e
e d
lc r
r r
r r
r r
r r
E u
S E
lA A
R E
E E
E S
S UE S
S S
S P
S S
t t
r t
t m
N o
d C
E
(
m n
o 3
3 s
1 0
1 2
3 o
C 3
4 5
6 9
1 1
1 1
1:
2 1
1:
7:
3 7
1 id G
G G
G G
G G
G G
G G
G G
G G
G G
G G
1 8
E G
G G
G G
G G
G G
G G
G G
G G
G G
G G
h N
N N
N N
N N
N N
N N
N N
N N
N N
N N
t laew s
g t
e n
a n
c it r
s s
o u
a e
m o
L c
s s
n m
e e
e r
o s
R u
ie r
C u
s e
a d
n p
C n
E x
a E
t o
o n
t m
o o
s e
tr R
it n
r o
o r
n o
e e
it lu p
f r
n t
a ia u
m t
t t
r F
S a
e A
e e
L t
p d
g L
n f
e O
n n
)
a o
i (4
m r
r t
a n
e 5
e lc it ig ai e
o e
e 5
a i
n c s 0
g n
n u
n e
t R
a N
g n
t i o
E cl i F
M ut f
C o
cs U
en e
le e
t t
0 v
h Ro a
Rre g
it u
1 h
is eA e
o rh c
mc q
ot C
e r
l e
d i r y
f e
b l
o R
f t
N E
v ov A
ibd O
r it f
fo Pc o
aE k
e n
k a
r k
i m ror c
c e
oo a
no a
W PC L
AC L
m-r
. - Supplemental Guidance l
Evaluation Factors for Discontinuing Commonwealth Edison Enhanced Oversight Factor 1.- Supplemental guidance is not required. This factor simply refiedts completion of licensee actions.
Factor 2 - Supplemental guidance is not required. This factor simply reflects completion of a
- licensee actions.
Factor 3 - This evaluation factor will be based upon NRC verification of Comed's implementation of selected SRI action plan activities. These verifications are not intended to be evaluations of the effectiveness of the licensee's initiatives. Overall effectiveness of licensee
- initiatives will be evaluated through the NRC inspection and assessment process. No special NRC inspections will be performed to evaluate SRI effectiveness.
Factor 4 - Supplemental guidance is required as this factor involves a judgement on the.
effectiveness of the licensee's self-assessment program. The following criteria should be satisfied to consider this evaluation factor met:
The licensee has completed effectiveness reviews associated with NGG-1, " Strengthen e
Performance Monitoring and Management," and NGG-13, " Strengthen Nuclear Safety Oversight," and determined that associated action steps resulted in an effective corrective action program at all of its operational nuclear plants.
Based upon results of the Plant Performance Review process starting in the e
Spring 1999, the NRC staff has determined that the licensee's operational nuclear plants are implementing adequate corrective action programs.
Factor S - Supplemental guidance is required as this factor involves a judgement as to the confidence the NRC staff has in the licensee's corporate management to effect change. The following criteria should be satisfied to consider this evaluation factor met:
Senior corporate management has outlined decisive and extensive steps to implement performance improvement emphasizing safe plant operations at the licensee's i
operational nuclear plants.
)
The licensee has assigned and demonstrated the use of sufficient resources to e-implement these steps.
e.
The licensee has developed and implemented processes to ensure corporate management knowledge and overview of plant performance, implementation of these
~ steps, and to take actions when related expectations are not being met.
. Facto [6 '- Supplemental guidance is required as this factor involves a judgement whether overall performance at each Commonwealth Edison plant justifies routine oversight and wtiether performance has significantly declined at any plant. The following criteria should be i
,, satisfied to consider this evaluation factor met:
Page 1 of 2 Attachrrant 2 1
The determination as to whether Comed performance at each site justifies routine oversight will be rnade at the Senior Management Meeting. As discussed in SECY-99-086, " Recommendations Regarding the Senior Management Meeting (SMM)
Process and Ongoing Improvements to Existing Licensee Performance Assessment Processes," the purpose of the April 1999 SMM, is to identify those plants that potentially warrant agency-level attention (i.e., " agency focus" plants) while screening out those plants that clearly warrant only routine oversight or regional-level attention (i.e., " regional-focus" plants). Agency-focus plants would be characterized by EDO and Commission involvement (e.g., issuance of an order) while regional-focus plants would be managed by the regional administrators (e.g., issuance of a confirmatory action letter, or implementation of the Inspection Manual Chapter 0350, " Staff Guidelines for Restart Approval," process).
Based upon results of the Plant Performanco Review process starting in 1999, a broad performance decline should not be present at any Commonwealth Edison nuclear power plant over a period of time deemed reasonable by the Commonwealth Edison Performance Oversight Panel (CPOP). To adversely impact this evaluation factor, declining performance should be broad enough to indicate fundamental weaknesses involving multiple organizations and processes and significant enough to warrant substantial NRC action (e.g., escalated enforcement involving programmatic concerns, issuance of a confirmatory action letter, or management meetings explicitly conducted to discuss this decline). The CPOP may determine that this factor is still met if the CPOP believes that the licensee through its self-assessment process is cognizant of a decline and taking reasonable actions to address the decline.
The following information is routinely discussed during internal NRC meetings of the e
CPOP. Significant related performance insights are factored into the Plant Performance Review process for each of the plants as appropriate.
Performance indicator data supplied by the licensee.
Licensee conclusions regarding performance at the plants compared to NRC inspection results.
e Enforcement actions.
Significant events / issues and effectiveness of lessons learned.
e Aggregate assessment of allegations.
e Effectiveness of corporate-. fide engineering initiatives.
Insights gained from attendance at select Comed oversight meetings.
e Impt et of licensee organizational changes.
Factor 7 - Supplemental guidance is not required. This factor simply reflects completion of specific NRC staff actions.
Page 2 of 2
3 t
n f
a a
e t
f b -
n io a
y h
l d e
t t
t a
s b
i im m
r h
s l
nf s s
A w
eCl
'e aoi s
S c
h t
r r
e ynn&emo nRa ee eh pnf e
a a
i eNe sht ost ef r
t T
G wot n
kofa e eiQat d t
t a
o r2sle A
i H
enhs net i
r t vt at elac o a yf rhot ain G
wmoSco o&h u t
i e
r i
e mdsla ei) irt ect l
t d v.
I o
es S
ct m weCh sf l
Rf adf n1f e i
f 3
R u s o
(
se oh r
t n4 neimpn nlu s
c 9
V eCidedLd o5 Sogaf f
9o E
Nr R
s p
r c eyoSeeo f t v
e s0 o
O ote 's e a m r y
1 l
gt it srt n
/7e nl Cs no e e5 s edao eaSee i
l r
f on afrdiR sdnuihn lpi 2g F
v iiRal
/
is eF t t eluaQa
,a nmt 5a F
)N h p renb C cc t
ur mo a
0P A
aI obvin i ot t
) st oo on TR n R e P 'e e r yl o
c n aie a e
t t
ct 0 ri SE eSh t
t p1 a nedliudt TOel f
,1 8
m (s ~. C e I Psafa9o p pgio ndyv C
i r
l nd a aE i
e n nts9 e eet a R
t abesm e8 l
t t
t pv 1 n sSnl sI t t e NL mi9(ic
.e nd t
3l o pe t
, a ia9l el sh 7u e
u Df
.e i
)
smpsC e.nmd i1 neet E(
s t
,1 s
r s u
di aout eeh
,ahs8yu en s
h w,cl C4 r
r N 5 a
ni7 r
t r Pt e9r et t
t c efoS t
i t
1 t a n
3w n m yh h n9ap ainfoipreep t
A0 S
v e x
1 u n ar k
r H 5 a, bio ge m n 3 e ph eg r
pfoaigt l
r t
n n seio pd e eSi NR e usde6et it t
t s
r r e wt Fa nsgtat e nbr e
EF N
G dc evieudr eea cSaofoee iRbe n t
s m
C h
O N 0 eiFOmcgno mnnf st et m i
g r
eai
.r sbf bedee nuaf e
r ivmeAeew oi
)
c S
I 1
n ir t nct aA 5i pt l
e I
U v
et l
adremdyo me e S pi e wb 7
caan r
c D
N a & y e pi r
vl e u E
I 9
st n
er f f
T9 eS 5 i
H N1 d) ymdot at sfe ye( s s p
i sQr v
l f
r nr a us r mea t
i T
O7 eGafoa eu ne edbdt u s ort r
p yau en nlunde c a
L e
s A
C2 sGuret eleJ q sa o ce n ne e.d9 n
SY nNaPnl e
nt i inmi ebt e9 ebsfagor eut E
e(J IDR sf i ns s c
e oidleta9 v
W nmcirC liol 2s icp A
u do t l pu1 ul Ke' ep pemcueomlaly l
N R U eot ies esme s cp O
ON h r adop R
ho ot s af t
. t M
F A TGdEdaOleN TccSAtef h ovu l
esceJ M
SJ O
RE e
C OH s
n S
TT o
E O
C O p
N s
Y A T e
F E
AR n n e
alas d
UE depe u
LF s
ecns st lc e AE snoe i h r t a e c VR s ain dt pn t
e s
E smck t e e
N aa isdom FI sr ds et e
o O
af e
nt r vw eein o r
lyei t s f
s h pcle n smer T
t ri e N
e a c
r gr eb eip x
uor a m,t E
o r
f t
c nef r M
c oooi le aduo a
r pcl S
F o
p pl s o cap m pd s p L
S h
n ni A
E n
t licda i
c so a ni N
S ito sayee ait
,olc O
S a
h chh hc siy st u
r st a
ac IS A
l Ef bs Eennd dolis d
et I
a C
v ae veee E
E mst mi v nsd ocimu r
t D
o t
n Csoed Crec lei t
epn E
a sa r
e a o
.of me R
f 1 rht 2ceic P
[
3 t
s n n
t t
n s
a s
a e
h n
e ie wl n
e g
e P
o h
m C
u ic h
m f
d eg oc mr it nT en R
e itn c
i r r sf c
ee da ha gd oN r i vh uif y
e t t ist sRu a
ti",d r 4. t d
ir t
i r sa nll wt ena nsnSs T
a s
t H
heihaA dntedie n gD n e ene d
A i
h n-d t o e n ch T Cd oi e el m i w e.
xioha G
ih o e n t
t mpc e r t
et t
S Pml a sT w iemnr s ec I
a a
3 R
' w d n. O a p t
ua nI aee nr e t
n cgo o
,oit t l n e we 9o E
8aioPe o a cf 9ir n ap ip f
ovmi.
9 eCis vn t
s r
t r
sa eom a
sh s ne i
V 9sl eDuPmpo eo f
9 2 i is ri iar t
r t.
sMep n p o, o r O
nt l
r c s-c t
/
t -
w d "w, d c 1
7e o
en n ec ce nla a eda r e o
,i m ls se 2g F
nt t
ca ot r
/a F
8coAsd t h n
o ph t a e r
5 2ec en en t n crafo;a megetnm 0P A
t pr) u v ah a 2. d h : e s et i
l iss TR s sie 1.fod eg%mDrCe np ds i
a oee St u
r l
n r
r gi h D s te nsr a
f a e er mp sir os sPo s
mr es invc em t
r t
C i
Ahfueyme!ss t o ef o oa eeoOs lsn m
enloe 1
ei vr R
vi t
nenp s
n n O pi a C u Pl t t
t NL n d e (t am t t ait o no c
soi esaivru SMteoyeniees i
o nv vo t
t Df t
n
)
c t ar ais E(
s neo ni eead hot t c r sa t
t eled nprpne n u
a st a c c ef sinh anPi C4 ee e c e
t i
t l
e eta N 5 a
ppePf
,h e
amocmr o r
nSer e f
f e f
es ot gt t
e w
e ar ce c s na e
e r e r e ot A0 S
Pt u i t r nl sii
=
H 5 Os it 9 smal aaAsyc gd dl pd h )e 9 er lef npr e l
Pnirowat elpo an NR ohm.sps oi s
na amcl EF Ci h yi /d9 soc sCr e a
,si p
nf ut C
cfCfiw8 eeNnPfot ua a t
r r p p:
t N
G a
miRno a e
r 2
i at r s icP n eOe st h
ef O
N 0
'd I sPee/
oic esSt s n nemPpcP l
O (v t.
ht 1
1 iS~
eR C de I
t r
t r
s ni f ht s C 's a El ae eim e U
oehs u
P 7. roo 7
sS R C Dprd e
r h s e
D N 9 s
h e eOms od nib iseN st ge t
E T9 e
e oe p gnst et Por paf on e I
eoca sehdct e nesi et aws aCCfo r
f H
N1 v
f r
ol h a T
O7 anht n e
n e
,t t
ndch eis ct srSseec l
L s et y a gl t
a e t
n r n e E
SY Clicsb np n S ", f' ccnh A'
C2 t e o oe m&ms e
- 5. i m o"
f nil a
ni imp e e
r
,3 r a emdi W
DR ResdseDec it t
n t
vec I
sdhr ema ee oid sc c1 1 r
A Nb eisn aGGCo oiri r
c svleciu r
t rt ic cumie N
R U e e l
vo uef eo ve os oq gr chf I
i O
ON h pr e en e RGGRcie qt r r e ea hv ef r e t
f n
M FA TsprP ew SNNNawprdv Tidepr M
SJ II
,l O
RE e
C OH sn S
S S
TT o
E E
E C O ps Y
Y Y
A T e
F E R
N C I
,I O N I
ipk TE r
AR s
s h
o s
UE o 'e '
d r
w yn LF s
e
- t t e f n r e d y AE n s l
i n
ee ar t
N i
mdae VR da sic se a vl a st e
eef E
nloc af es eogs FI a
f dugcr t !
t r na O
dn e e sne e np t
e r. o eeh i n v r s t
T pmt nhn d
t r t i m w l
ea s
ise eick mgss osf N
r E
o le s o t
e ay en M
c v enn emdt n gi e o t
a vdf a
esoa lpayo a ei S
F dsilp i
s nivd t
rf t aa m gtnds ahon L
S s
t n o
ne map A
E n
cr a i
a nn e
r o
haeio sr N
S it a pd a d t
I ~
S a
Cedmt ht i ed e o e,h O
c t t Rt l a
n oca a
cg S~
A la u
e det n rdnis npe o
I Nemi Emtsat oear C
v v
t E
E emic ms nms pt me t
r i v
D heye oser n omr o o
o c
Cemf o Cmfrdi Tl f
pi r s
r it E
h r r meo
.sle ec
. oent R
4aepa 5cpae 3 ivc P
i_
3 E
d t
d E s.
ne n
n ms m
a a
o e P
n c
h
)
) nr oCo O
c
- 6. soei 9
Pn a
l r
vslap Cio 9c jL 9iDios t
T t
d i
n t
A l
H 1 bd Enmt it a o icc t
yun a
G r pahlamh b
l t c ug I
a t
-g S
ud pod e 3
R n n 3. e y C e p pin
,l a n
n s ai 9o E
a aDw n f
a ein
,a V
Jl
,n hmi dm 9 3 a
O h n 2. m t t o at rd e e
/7e grD aten t
r 2g F ute(
e a
a 5
mcde cs
/e F
on s ri o nedt dh ii 0P A
h m
TR h PmCassg nt St 8Ote! msri is t
u es ss C
9P hocgre Ae r
i i
f sa v r
9 nt Ru Caa edn o
.d i
ri 1
l a l t
a ed NL ePepsma lpi lrh i
bn a e
l m
l D )f pt r
l e
r E(
s A gi a i
, or
( nr eMio m w
~
u t
C4 siapnMe t
i n n oy N 5 a
rh el
~
l A0 S
Ru t
H 5 P dCceccSse cu l
h t J PdPadiet e
rhf yd NR eOdt pt i
EF nmPe nA o
t om t
r a 9n C
er N
G coCece9o n n O
N 0 ef yiit 9it s
df h i
i ebsnt 1 a id r
S I
1 r
t ng c
2E U 7 spdoiA 6l r
I
,i D
N m
s p
o o I 9 osec E
T9 mtnis adyp r
t ioaa cC H
N1 e uit e
qe urMt a
T O7 hmeco e n
Fh t sr nh pna it LA C2 nw t
or ns said o
E SY r
oegm wega ig I
t W
D R s n dnw an dsir s A
eat ot ni uit t
N R U s
ef nee s e a e l
O ON a eerelat et v e x
M F A Bt mppeMis Em h
M SJ O
RE e
C OH sn s
TT o
e O
C O p
Y N
s A T e
F E R
N C O N I
n TE n
od AR i
)i l Ce Pt e UE n
n a
laRi oOum LF AE l
l r
isPao Nc t
VR a
e dCvf f
E eod E( enio N
FI cl t l
r t
ne n he e st nhans O
a va t
l ec aat hee T
ml i t ePo dni t i t
f s
r in N
wt eniv E
o o en a r
n gl nhhaei t
f t ip ogt hc t
ri M
c e u s i t et a a
poa y ms at S
F n
r efoP t a mehl L
S yr A
E n
t au o v p nO t
N S
io e
ot C OdmoP f s a
e oisC t
a eh O
S a
st t
en ie Ccic s S
A la I
dtawc Rnme imu u
e n
ct r
IC v
Eih a Narmteamin E
E md gm e
t eson r
D osir s o hodoCo r
Ct Tf r
n ef r st c
E r
.ive
.ea ces a
R 6 pop 7Phfahit d P
f I
l,5 y
~
4 l
1 The'results of the CPOP's assessment to determine if the termination criteria have been
-satisfied are provided as Attachment 3. Termination Criterion 2 remains open pending completion of a public meeting with Comed, tentatively scheduled for mid-July, to discuss
- whether the internal effectiveness reviews of the SRis were successful in identifying
. performance trends, both positive and negative. The results of the April 1999 SMM discussions
- were presented during a Commission Meeting on May 6,1999, where the staff informeo the Commission that due to performance improvement, none of the Comed sites required agency action beyond routine oversight.
Conclusion:
Upon determining that Termination Criterion 2 has been satisfied, the staff intends to discontinue CPOP activities. Consistent with the SMM results, the staff plans'on providing a routine level of inspection for the Comed sites over the next 6 months. As part of the normal Plant Performance Review (PPR) process, the staff will evaluate performance trends at each of the Comed sites, as well as conduct an integrated assessment of Comed performance. In addition to the PPR public meetings to discuss licensee performance at specific reactor
' facilities, the staff plans to conduct a public meeting to discuss overall Comed performance.
Attachments: 1.. Commonwealth Edison Oversight Matrix
- 2. Supplemental Guidance-Evaluation Factors for Discontinuing Commonwealth Edison Enhanced Oversight
'3. Assessment of Evaluation Factors for Discontinuing Enhanced NRC Oversight in Reference to the January 27,1997,10 CFR 50.54(f) Letter cc w/atts:
M. Knapp, DEDE F. Miraglia, DEDR P. Norry, DEDM J. Blaha, AO S. Collins, NRR R. Schroll, SECY OGC CFO CIO OCA OlG OPA' Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ACNW, ASLBP PDR.
DCS P1-17 DOCUMENT NAME: A:\\ COMED 11.com.wpd
- See Previous Concurrence
- v.,
h,..
, e mi. e uen.ni. ine m m. nom c - copy witnout.ti.cnm.nv.ncesur. r - co >v wien.it.cnm.nt/.ncio.or. u -dy OFFICE Rlll:DRP l Rill:DRP l Rill:DRS l HQ:NRR l Rlll: ORAL ESQ /
NAME BBurgess/k]c* GGrant*
SReynolds*
SCollins*
JDyer*
WMvfrs DATE 06/7/99 06/7/99 06/7/99 06/8/99 06/7/99 06/Nb9 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
4,.
4 The CPOP concluded that its oversight should be reduced when routine regional and headquarters oversight would provide adequate direction to the inspection program for regulation of each Comed site. The results of the CPOP's assessment to determine if the termination criteria have been satisfied are provided as Attachment 3. Termination Criterion 2 remains open pending completion of a public meeting with ComE). tentatively scheduled for mid Ju!y, to discuss _whether the intomal effectiveness reviews of the SRis were successful in identifying performance trends, both positive and negative; The results of the April 1999 SMM discussions were presented during a Commission Meeting on May 6,1999, where the staff informed the Commission that due to performance improvement, none of the Comed sites required agency action beyond routine oversight.
==
Conclusion:==
~
Upon determining that Termination Criterion 2 has been satisfied, the staff intende to discontinuo CPOP activities. Consistent with the SMM rest'lts, the staff plans on pr:..mding a routine level of inspection for the Comed sites over the next 6 months. As part of tt ; normal Plant Performance Review (PPR) process, the staff will evaluate performance trends at each of the Comed sites, as well as conduct an integrated assessment of Comed performance, in addition to the PPR public meetings to discuss licensee performance at specific reactor facilities, the staff plans to conduct a public meeting to discuss overall Comed performance.
Attachments: 1. Commonwealth Edison Oversight Matrix
- 2. Supplemental Guidance-Evaluation Factors for Discontinuing Commonwealth Edison Enhanced Oversight
- 3. Evaluation Factors for Discontinuing Enhanced NRC Oversight in Reference to the January 27,1997,10 CFR 50.54(f) Letter cc w/atts:
M. Knapp, DEDE F. Miraglia, DEDR P. Norry, DEDM J. Blaha, AO S. Collins, NRR R. Schroll, SECY OGC CFO CIO OCA OlG OPA Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ACNW, ASLBP l
PDR t
DCS P1-17
- DOCUMENT NAME: A:\\ COMED 11.com.wod
- See Previous Concurrence To r.c.ive. cope et ini. accum.nt, indic.ta in en. box: c. copy witnout tt. cam nt/.ncio.or. e co >y wien.et cnment/.ncio.ur. w No copy
- NOFF!CE Rill:DRP l Rill:DRP l Rill:DRS l HQ:NRR l Rlll: ORA l EDO l
NAME BBurgess/kjc* GGrant*
SRoynolds*
SCollins*
JDyer*
WTravers l
DATE 06///99 06/7/99 06/7/99 06/8/99 06/7/99 06/ /99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
_n
I 4
The CPOP concluded that its oversight should be reduced when routine regional and headquarters oversight would provide adequate direction to the inspection program for regulation of each Comed site. The results of the CPOP's assessment to determine if the termination criteria have been satisfied are provided as Attachment 3. Termination Criterion 2 remains open pending completion of a public meeting with Comed, tentatively scheduled for mid-July, to discuss whether the internal effectiveness reviews of the SRis were successful in identifying performance trends, both positive and negative. The results of the April 1999 SMM discussions were presented during a Commission Meeting on May 6,1999, where the staff informed the Commission that due to performance improvement, none of the Comed sites l
required agency action beyond routine oversight.
==
Conclusion:==
Upon determining'that Termination Criterion 2 has been satisfied, the staff intends to discontinue CPOP activities. Consistent with the SMM results, the staff plans on providing a routine level of inspection for the Comed sites over the next 6 months. As part of the normal Plant Performance Review (PPR) process, the staff will evaluate performance trends at each of the Comed sites, as well as conduct an integrated assessment of Comed performance. In addition to the PPR public meetings to discuss licensee performance at specific reactor facilities, the staff plans to conduct a public meeting to discuss overall Comed performance.
Attachments: 1. Commonwealth Edison Oversight Matrix
- 2. Supplemental Guidance-Evaluation Factors for Discontinuing Commonwealth Edison Enhanced Oversight
-3. Evaluation Factors for Discontinuing Enhanced NRC Oversight in Reference to the January 27,1997,10 CFR 50.54(f) Letter cc w/atts:
M. Knapp, DEDE F. Mire. glia, DEDR P. Norry, DEDM J. Blaha, AO S. Collins, NRR R. Schroll, SECY OGC CFO ClO OCA OlG OPA Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ACNW, ASLBP h
PDR DCS P1-17 DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\SECY\\ PAPER.COM *See Previous Concurre b
To receive a copf of this document, Indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure "E" opy with ttachment/ enclosure "N" = No co )y OFFICE Rill:DRP* l Rlli:DRP*
l Rill:DRS*
ln /M:NjW/l Rlll: ORA
- l NAME Burgess /kje Grant Reynolds CCon Dyer day ( 06/7/99 06/7/99 06/7/99 106/8 /99 06/799 OFFICIAL RECORD COP %
dT i (v ((0 m
JUN-07-1999 13140 NRC R!!! DRP 630 515 1102 P.02/02 l
4 Supplemental guidance was developed to define how the termination criteria should be applied (Attachment 2). In developing both the termination criteria and supplemental evaluation guidance, the CPOP considered the apparent weaknesses (described in the RFI) identified by the NRC staff through the SMM process as the root causes for cyclic performance at the Comed sites.
The CPOP concluded that its oversight should be reduced when routine regional and headquarters oversight would provide adequate direction to the inspection program for regulation of each Comed site. The results of the CPOP's assessment to determine if the termination criteria have been satisfied are provided as Attachment 3. Termination Criteria 2 remains open pending completion of a public meeting with Comed, tentatively scheduled for i
mid-June, to discuss whether the intemal effectiveness reviews of the SRis were successful in identifying performance trends, both positive and negative. The results of the April 1999 SMM discussions were presented during a Commission Meeting on May 6,1999, where the staff informed the Commission that due to performance improvement, none of the Comed sites required agency action beyond routine oversight.
C_onclusion:
i Upon determining that Termination Criteria 2 has been satisfied, the staff intends to discontinue CPOP activities. Consistent with the SMM results, the staff plans on providing a routine level of inspection for the Comed sites over the next 6 months. As part of the normal Plant Performance Review (PPR) process, the staff will evaluate performance trends at each of the Comed sites, as well as conduct an integrated assessment of Comed performance. In addition to the PPR public meetings to discuss licensee performance at specific reactor facilities, the i
staff plans to conduct a public meeting to discuss overall Comed performance.
Attachments: 1. Commonwealth Edison Oversight Matrix
- 2. Supplemental Guidance-Evaluation Factors for Discontinuing Commonwealth Edison Enhanced Oversight
- 3. Evaluation Factors for Discontinuing Enhanced NRC Oversight in Reference to the January 27,1997,10 CFR 50.54(f) Letter DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\SECY\\ PAPER 11.COM To receive a cap r of this documeet, ledicate in the bort "C" a Copy wilhout anachmenvenclosure "E*
- Copy with attachmer.t/ enclosure "N" a No co y i
OFFICE Rll@
l Rill:DRP,l H Rlll:DRS lE HQ:NRR l
Rlli: ORA l NAME BuWs/kje Grant h Reynolds D Collins Dyer (hfV DATE 06/W/99 06Mt /9DV )
06/t//99 06/ /99 06/ 9 9
'tWICIAL RECORD COPY TOTAL P.02 J
tion:.J
['#m aseg*o UNITED STATES Cys:
TrahMs f
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Knapp WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 Miraglia e
o, Norry
- o March 26, 1999 IN RESPONSE, PLEASE REFER TO: M990302A OFFICE OF THE Blaha SECRUARY Byert-Riff Collins, NR Schroll, SECY MEMORANDUM TO:
William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations FROM:
Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary i[M V
SUBJECT:
STAFF REQUIREMENTS - MEETING WITH COMMONWEALTH EDISON,9:30 A.M., TUESDAY, MARCH 2,1999, COMMISSIONERS' CONFERENCE ROOM, ONE WHITE FLINT NORTH, ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND (OPEN TO PUBLIC ATTENDANCE) l The Commission was briefed by representatives from Commonwealth Edison (Comed) and members of the NRC staff on the progress and improvements at Comed nuclear power plants.
The Commission requested further information on the criteria used by the staff for determining when performance at Comed's nuclear plants has improved sufficiently to normalize NRC inspection resources and discontinue the Comed Performance Oversight Panel (CPOP).
4 l
(EOG) M (Rlll).
(SECY Suspense:
6/45/99) 199900038 l
6/8/99 cc:
Chairman Jackson I
Commissioner Dieus l
Commissioner Diaz Commissioner McGaffigan Commissioner Merrifield OGC CFO CIO OCA OlG OPA Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ACNW, ASLBP (via E-Mail)
POR - Advance DCS - P1-17 490'iOiOIN Y'
.