ML20213E491
| ML20213E491 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 08/02/1983 |
| From: | Rajender Auluck Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Kimball J, Leu K, Yueh-Li Li NRC |
| References | |
| CON-WNP-0623, CON-WNP-623 NUDOCS 8308090374 | |
| Download: ML20213E491 (12) | |
Text
..
At!5 0 21983 DISTRIBUTION:
Document Control c LB #2 Fil e~ - - ~ ~
RAuluck
/
Docket No. 50-397 I:EMOPANDUM FOR:
Distribution list (attached)
FROM:
.R. Auluck, Project Manager, Licensing Branch No. 2 Division of Licensing StGJECT:
SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE (SALP) INPUTS Please provide your comments in evaluating Washington Public Power Supply Systems (WPPSS) performance with respect to their project No. 2 (WNP-2) during the period from August 1,1932 through July 31, 1983.
The evaluation criteria is provided to assist you complete the licensing activity form.
Your coments should specifically support the category selected in the evaluation criteria.
Please provide your comments to me (MS-144) no later than August 8,1983 in order to incorporate them in the overall evaluation.
If you need additional information, call me at X28547.
N@$nal c1ynec y.
R. Auluck, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 2 Division of Licensing Attachments: as stated M
8308090374 030802
~J^l -
(F ADOCK 05000397 1:P
~
.i.. I. ' M f. L. C,
,l,
~ l orrier y DL:.l #
..U C..k,;pm A.Ss senc r SLdNWE oarnp.dd.83
@//8 r
.~
-n
(
(
4 e k'
l e
=
s L.Jll s
M W
~
y M.
w 4.1 I t
c M
I a '.6
=
-:v.-
,!I
.s i
+
t m
L U
Q m
3 d
- J b-m m
C
=
C m m
U C
M
~~
m 2
=
C C C
C U
LJ
~~
U
, O Ce C
~3 m2 L J G oJ o C U
C U
C U C U d U U
D.*4 U >
C =
a-f:
.C D
tn
.E-u-C m
U
<a C
C C L U C m O.C C
b*
s
=
=
> LJ C*. >
0M U O
L L
C L2 C C k U 'u L
C Q
C-
- c. c: t-m u
e
,o r3 C
U C
U.
L
=
C aC c
- LJ C:
M W
w
.N re w
, -C
. n.
SYSTEMWflC AS$ # *ENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMeCE NRC Appendix 0516 PART II EVALUATJON CRITERIA The assasment of lictnsee performance is implemented through the use of seven evaluation criteria. 'The criteria which provide standard guidanc6, are applied to each' functiona] ares for 'the categorization of' licensee performance.
To provide a c6nsistent evainstion of licensee performance, several attributes associated with each criterion are listed to describe the characteristics appli-cable to the three categories.
The seven criteria discussed in Chapter NRC-0516-04 are list.ed in Table I with their associated attributes, These form th'e guidance which aids in uhdcrstanding and evaluaiing licensee performance by ider;tifying the causes and factors appropriate for categorization. It is not fhtended that considera-tion of these' attributes influence established programs of the agency. For example, it is nut intended that specific inspections be perfo med to evaluate attributes.
It is expected that during the irhplementation of establisl ed 3
programs many of the attributes whjch describe performance M*ill be observed.
Cognizance of these attributes should assist the staff in their observation of' licensee performance during routine activities,
)
All of the attribute.s of the evaluation criteria are not necessarily applicable.
[.
In-some instanges, the observed performance within a functional area may be
%s insufficient to allow consideration in the evaluation. Ccnversely, additional attributes may be appropriate for the evaluation. Matters such as Quality Assurance, Design Control, Training and the like, are attributes of each functional, area and. should be considered in the evaluation of the functional t
areas. On the other hand, if there is a problem with cne of these attributes that is observed in several functional ' areas, it may be desirable to highlight.
1 that attribute in a separate discussien; e.g., Quality Assurance may be a problem in Operaticas, Radiological Control and Surveillance. It would be appropriate to discuss Quality Assurance as if it were a functional area, in addition to covering the specific QA problem in each functional area.
i The listed attributes are intended cnly as guidance in the assessment of performance in the functional areas and thus, are indicators of the licensee
\\
performan ce.
It is emphasized that all available information should be analyzed by the SALP Board, and its significance, whether it be positive or negative, should be weighed. If information is scarce or nonexistent, a decision as to performance as it relates to an attribute should not be forced.
l 3
Approved : March 23,19S2
J
(.
r en
~ +<
TABLE.1 O (n d..m H
EVALUATION GitITERI A V!IT!I ATTRIBUTES FOR ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE
$Z m>4 1.
MANAGEMENT INVOINEMENT _AND CONTitOL IN ASSURING QUALITY mO T~
$m$
Ca t egory_1_
Category 2 Category 3
- o T '
t consistent ev'idence of prior pian-evidence of prior planning little evidence of prior planning 3 c.
ning and assignment of prioritics; and assignment of priorities; and assignment of priorities; well stated, controlled and explicit stated, defined procedures poorly stated or ill understood M:'
0 procedures for conttol of activities for control of activities procedures for control of activities d
well stated, dissemina1cd and under-adequately stated and under-poorly stated, poorly understood k
standable policies stood policies or non-existent policies decision making consistently at a decision malcing usually at a decision making seldom at a level level that ensures adequate level that ensures adequate that ensures adequate management management review management review review m
corporate management frequently corporate management usually corporate management seldom involved in site activities involved in site activities involved in site activities audits complete, ti.ncly and thorough audits generally complete, audits frequently not timely, and thorough incomplete or not thorough
'G committees properly staffed and committees usually properly committees not properly staffed c
functioning in almost all cases staffed and functioning or functioning a
2:
g reviews timely, thorough and reviews generally timely,,
reviews not timely, thorough or n
o-technically sound thorough and technically sound technically sound
,3 g
a m
3 records complete, well maintained records generally complete, well records not complete, not well D
and available maintained and available maintained or unavailable 6w x
procedures and policies strictly procedures and policies rarely procedures and policies occa-o G
adhered to violated sionally violated yj m
e, t)
correctiv'c action systems promptly corrective action systems corrective action systen s rarely y.
y and consistently recognize and generally rec 6gnize and recognize and address non-o g
address ban-reportable concerns address non-reportable concerns reportable concerns g
a v
9 procurement well controlled and procurement generally well repetitive breakdown in procure-N 3
documented controlled and documented ment control S.
rare breakdowlns of minor Y
g.
design well controlled and verified repetitive breakdown in designs a
significance ir) design control control or verification g
ca or verification
~m
~
ES 2.
APPROACll TO RESOLUTION OF TECllNICAL ISSUES FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 clear understanding of issues understanding of issues understanding of issues demonstrated generally apparent frequently lacking conservatism routinely exhibited conservatism generally exhibited meets minimum requirements when potential for safety significance exists technically sound and thorough viable and generally sound and often viable approaches, but approaches in almost all cases thorough approaches lacking in thoroughness or
,Q depth tn 4
t* m timely resolutions in almost all generally timely resolutions resolutions often delayed gf-cases m-Z go m>
(n M
M m Nn l
1 n i
O 3 Nm 3%
>H ZoO m "1
'O
^
e e
m t
3.
RESPONSIVENESS TO NRC INITI ATIVES CQ o2v Category 1 Category 2 '
Category 3
$M
$1 3 meets deadlines generally timely responses frequently requires extensions M$
of time
- o ~
i l
MO N
]y$
timely resolution of issues few longstanding regulatory longstanding regulatory issues issues attributable to licensee attributable to licensee y
3 v.
technically sound and thorough viable and generally sound and often viable responses, but y ".2 lacking in thoroughness or ci a responses in almost all cases thorough responses depth My acceptable resolutions proposed acceptable resolutions generally considerable NRC effort or k
initially in most cases proposed repeated submittals needed to obtain acceptable resolutions u
4.
ljNFORCEMENT lilSTORY Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 major violations are rare and are major violations are rare and may multiple major violations or not indicative of programmatic indicate minor programmatic programmatic breakdown breakdown breakdown indicated
'ao minor violations are not repetitive multiple minor violations or
~ minor violations are repetitive and not indicative of programmatic minor programmatic breakdown and indicative of programmatic breakdown indicated breakdown Z
a.
N O
corrective action is prompt and corrective action is timely '
corrective action is delayed
,{
effective and effective in most cases or not effective v
7 m
D 3
O x
0 s
fO O
r
' ^ ^
\\
/
m.
5.
IIEPORTING AND ANALYSIS OF ItEPORTABLE EVENTS l'
k; w
.- o
}
Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 y'
to t) events promptly and' completely events are reported in a timely event reporting is frequently late E
u-Y reported.
manner, some information may or incomplete S.
{
be lacking si o#
o events are properly identified events are accurately identified, events are poorly identified or 0
~
and analyzed some analyses are marginal analyses are marginal, events are associated with programmatic weaknesses B
corrective action is effective corrective action is usually corrective action is not timely as indicated by lack of repetition taken but may not be effective nor effective, events are as indicated by occasional repetitive repetition m
G.
STAFFING (INCLUDING MANAGEMENT)
Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 positions are identified, authorities key positions are identified, positions are poorly identified, and responsibilities are well defined and authorities and responsi-or authorities and responsibil-bilities are defined ities are ill-defined m
H t~ tus vacant key positions are filled key positions usually filled key positions are left vacant 5.~
on priority basis in a reasonable time for extended periods of time
{ -
m n pj$
staffing is ample as indicated by staffing is adequate, staffing is weak or minimal as control over backlog and overtime occasional difficulties with indicated by excessive backlog y
backlog or overtime and overtime ti m x tv
- r1 M O5 5 r.0
.5: x; 0O tis e s r
s
~.
f,
\\
7.
TR'AINING AND QUALIFICATION EFFECTIVENESS CQ a>v Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 EM
$3 training and qtialification program training and qualification training and qualification M%
makes a positive contribution, program contributes to an program is found to be the N~O commensurate with procedures adequate understanding of major contributing factor to and staffing, to understanding work and fair adherence poor understanding of work, NO of work and adherence to procedures to procedures with a modest as indicated by numerous procc-gg with few personnel errors number of personnel errors dure violations or personnel 3:yg errors 1
training program is well defined a defined program is program may be either lacking, b'j and implemented with dedicated implemented for a large portion poorly defined, or ineffectively resources and a means for feed of the staff applied for a significant segment k
back experience; program is applied of the staff to nearly all staff to d
.U 22 z
N 9
O
' 3s M
u U
n tr 8
is g
x 5
S?
E
9 r
3.
RESPONSIVENESS TO NRC INITI ATIVES CQ o
$m Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 3
meets deadlines generally timely responses frequently requires extensions tn g i
of time m-l to o W
timely resolution of issues few longstanding regulatory longstanding regulatory issues
]$
issues attributable to licensee attributable to licensee m
y 3 r,.
technically sound and thorough viable and generally sound and often viable responses, but g
lacking in thoroughness or o bi tn */
responses in almost all cases thorough responses depth acceptable resolutions' proposed acceptable resolutions generally considerabic NRC cffort or i
initially in most cases proposed repeated submittals' needed to obtain acceptable resolutions u
4.
ENFOllCEMENT IllSTOltY Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 major violations are rare and are major violations are rare and may multiple major violations or not indicative of programmatic indicate minor programmatic programmatic breakdown 1
breakdown breakdown indicated i
v t
minor violations are not repetitive multiple minor violations or minor violations are repetitive y
and not indicative of programmatic minor programmatic breakdown and indicative of programmatic d
breakdown indicated breakdown Z
o.
W O
corrective action is prompt and corrective action is timely corrective action is delayed y
m effective and effective in most cases or not effective I
Pr Eo 0
x Se
- =
t
.y fi.
ItEPOftTING AND ANALYSIS OF ltEPORTABLE EVENTS Pg o
a
{
Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 3,
m
'o events promptly and completely events are reported in a timely event reporting is frequently late 3
3 reported manner, some information may or incompletc S,
y be lacking E
o o
events are properly identified events are accurately identified, events are poorly identified or
!C O
~
and analyzed some analyses are marginal analyses are marginal, events are associated with programmatic
}
weaknesses to corrective action is effective corrective action is usually corrective action is not timely as indicated by lack of repetition taken but may not be effective nor effective, events are as indicated by occasional repetitive repetition 4
G.
STAFFING (INCLUDING MANAGEMENT)
Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 positions are identified, authorities key positions are identified, positions are poorly identified, and responsibilities are well defined and authorities and responsi-or authorities and responsibil-Q bilities are defined ities are ill-defined tn4 V rn vacant key positions are filled key positions usually filled key positions are left vacant MF on priority basis in a reasonable time for extended periods of time F'
Ind staffing is ample as indicated by staffing is adequate, staffing is weak or minimal as gj$
control over backlog and overtime occasional difficulties with indicated by excessive backlog y
backlog or overtime and overtime to tn y tn
- n lA O$
w-N)r Z*
Z OO tn *n
~.
7.
TilAINING AND QUAIIFICATION EFFECTIVENESS C$
$. ui o
I M
Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 NN training and qualification program training and qualification training and qualification t" >g makes a positive contribution, program contributes to an program is found to be the m-commensurate with procedures adequate understanding of major contributing factor,to yO and staffing, to understanding work and fair adherence poor understanding of work, y$
of work and adherence to procedures to procedures with a modest as indicated by numerous proce-x with few personnel errors number of personnel errors dure violations or personnel Z
crrors
?.
- i. i training program is well defined a defined program is program may be either lacking, tog and implemented with dedicated implemented for a large portion poorly defined, or ineffectively resources and a means for feed of the staff applied for a significant segment k
back experience; program is applied of the staff to nearly all staff e
to e
- s D
'tj 2
i e
z (D
W O
- s e;
u Pr 9
E ow x
O w
M
4 i
f Distribution Y.C. Li K.C. Leu J.K. Kimball I.B. Al terman A. Masciantonio J.E. Jackson j.
R.J. Wright-l M.R. Hum J. Halapatz D.E. Smith D.J. Kubicki F.J. Witt T.E. Collinss R.A. Kendall i
. F. El tawila j
J.N. Ridgely j
S.C. Rhow R.J. Giardina M. Tokar S. Sun C. Hinson 4
R.W. Froelich i
F.R. Allenspach W.0. Long I
i I
r l
I f
i 1
I l
i
_ _, _. _. ~. _, _ _ _ _ _, _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ -
.- ~
. -