ML20203L862
| ML20203L862 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 02/26/1998 |
| From: | Miller H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Langenbach J GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197A880 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-98-99, NUDOCS 9803060275 | |
| Download: ML20203L862 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000289/1998099
Text
_ - - _ - __- _ - - - - -
,
b
f
February 26,1998
l
Mr. J. Langenbach
Vice President and Director
Three Mile Island
GPU Nuclear, Inc.
Route 441 South
P. O. Box 480
Middletown, PA 17057-0480
SUBJECT:
THREE MILE ISLAND UNIT 1 SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE
PERFORMANCE (SALP) REPORT NO. 50-289/98-99
Dear Mr. Langenbach:
'
This letter forwards the SALP report for Three Mile Island Unit 1 for the period August 5,
1996 through January 24,1998 (Enclosure 1). The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) conducted this assessment using the SALP process that the agency implemented on
July 19,1993, in this process, the NRC evaluates the performance t f licensees in four
functional areas: Operations, Engineering, Maintenance, and Plant Support. The Plant
Support area comr'ises radiological and effluent controls, chemistry, security, emergency
preparedness, fire protection, cr.d housekeeping.
We noted performance at Three Mile Island Unit 1 during the assessment period was
mixed. The low number of plant transients and reliable equipment operation reflected
excellent operator performance and equipment material condition. Superior performance
ratings were achieved in the areas of Operations and Maintenance. Senior management
involvement in plant activities was usually a strength with a generally good focus on
problem identification and resolution. However, performance declined in the engineering
area; the second consecutive assessment in which a decline was noted, indicating that
.
previous offorts to improve performance in that area were not effective. Corrective action
programs, while improved, were not fully of fective in achieving timely resolution of some
problems. Improvements were needed in the conduct, tracking, and oversight of the
corrective action process. Additionally, some problems with procedure implementation
were noted in several areas.
Performance in the operations area was rated Category 1. Human performance was
generally excellent; the operators responded well to the infrequent transients and
equipment problems. Effective management involvement was evident on a daily basis
during routine power operation, controlled evolutions and transient conditions. However,
on occasion the operators did not rigorously follow approved procedures, the most
noteworthy example resulted in a reactor coolant system overfill. The licensed operator
requalification program remained strong.
I
1
J
!
9803060275 980226
klllIklll![{\\!!0\\k!
kk!)!k!!!
ADOCK 05000289
O
p' h.
'
_ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - -
-
-
-
-
-
-
,
4
.
Mr. J. Langenbach
2
Performance in the maintenance area was rated Category 1. The performance of
maintcnance and surveillance activities was very geod. Strong management support,
l
effective supervisor oversight, and improved planning contributed to high equipment
l
reliability and availability.
As noted above, overall performance in the engineering area declined and was rated
4
Category 3. Significant problems were identified in many engineering program areas.
Examples included problems with the Inservice Testing (IST), the Motor Operated Valve
(MOV) programs, the Quality Classification List (OCL) Process, and technical support.
Adverse findings associated with engineering performance, which were identified by
oversight groups, were not effectively addressed until eventually found by the NRC. In
contrast, system engineering provided generally good support to address emergent issues.
The procurement engineering program was excellent and had good management oversight.
-
Performance in the plant support area was rated Category 2. Overall performance in the
radiation protection area was good, though there were some problems in the controls of
hot particles, and posting and monitoring of areas within the radiologically controlled area.
The security program was implemented very well. Some significant performance problems
were identified during the March 1997 emergency drill, which required a remedial drill be
conducted. These performance problems highlighted ineffective management involvement
__
in the emergency preparedness area.
We have scheduled a management meeting with you at 2:00 P.M. on March 18,1998.
The meeting is open to the public. At the meeting, you should be prepared to discuss our
assessment and the initiatives you ilave ongoing or plan to take to address the weakr.osses
detailed in our evaluation.
Enclosure 2 provides the schedule of NRC inspections of your f acility planned for the next
year. We willinform you of any changes. The routine resident inspection effort is not
included in this schedule. We appreciate your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Original Signed By:
Hubert J. Miller
Regional Administrator
Docket No. 50-289
Enclosures:
1.
Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance No. 50-289/98 99
2.
NRC Inspection Plan
-_
,.
-
-4.
l y'9 ' '%:
,.
Mr. J. Langenbach
3
cc w/ encl:
J. C. Fornicola, Director, Nuclear Safety Review
M. J. Ross, Director, Operations and Maintenance
- D. Smith, PDMS Manager
TMI Alert (TMIA)
M. Leggart, Manager, TMI Regulatory Affairs
E. L. Blake, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge (Legal Counsel for GPUN)
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Distribution w/ encl:
P.egion I Docket Room (with concurrences)
Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)
PUBLIC
NRC Resident inspector-
H. Miller (RA)/W. Axelson, OHA (All inspe': tion Reports)
W. Schmidt, DRP
. S.- Hansell, DRP
J. Yerokun, DRS
N. Perry, DRP -
D. Haverkamp, DRP
A. Linde, DRP
M. Oprendek, DRP
J. Lanning, DRP
B. McCabe, OEDO
L.Thonus,NRR
S. Weiss, NRR
R. Correia, NRR
F. Talbot, NRR
JJ. ' Lieberman, OE -
M. Campion, ORA
DOCDESK-
Inspection Program Branch, NRR (IPAS)
DOCUMENT NAME: 'G:\\ BRANCH 7\\98SALP.TMI
Ta recolve a copy of this document. Indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure T = Copy with attachmertWwlosure
"N" _= No
-copy
,
OFFICE-
RI/DRP-
..
I
RI/DRS
l
HQ/NRR
I
Rl/AV
l-
l
NAME
Hehl 6P W
1 911cholson
CThomas*
J141er
DATE
02/24/98
02/ty /98 ~
02/23/988
12/pr/98
02/
/98
0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
- CONCURRENCE VIA TELEPHONE