ML20214A131
| ML20214A131 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron  |
| Issue date: | 11/13/1986 |
| From: | Olshan L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Bernero R, Miraglia F, Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214A133 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8611190246 | |
| Download: ML20214A131 (5) | |
Text
-
November 13, 1986 l
Docket No. STN 50-454 DISTRIBUTION, 50-455 iDocketcFile JNRC PDR Local PDR PD#3 Rdg.
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Thomas M. Novak, Acting Director C. Rossi L. Olshan Division of PWR Licensing-A C. Vogan Frank J. Miraglia, Director Division of PWR Licensing-B Robert Bernero, Director Division of BWR Licensing William T. Russell, Director Division of Human Factors Technology Themis Speis, Director Division of Safety Review and Oversight THRU:
Steven A. Varga, Director Project Directorate #3 Division of PWR Licensing-A FROM:
Leonard N. Olshan, Project Manager Project Directorate #3 Division of PWR Licensing-A
SUBJECT:
DRAFT NRR INPUT FOR SALP - BYRON STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 is a draft of the NRR input for the SALP for Comonwealth Edison Company. This draft report is based primarily upon the mini-SALP evaluations enclosed with SEs prepared during this SALP period (see Enclosure 2), and the Project Manager's overview.
j Please review the draft evaluation and provide any comments you feel appropriate.
All coments received by November 18, 1986 will be considered for incorporation in the final report.
Your comments may be provided verbally due to the short turn-around time.
Please note that the licensee overall evaluation for " Licensing Activities" is a Category 2.
The assigned SES for this plant is Steven Varga.
\\
,IS;l Leonard N. Olshan, Project Manager Project Directorate #3 Division of PWR Licensing-A
Enclosures:
As stated l
l
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE CVogan)
PDl3 PD#3
]
!.~
L01shan*
arga*
i
'.1 L3/86 11/
8 g]/13/86 l
8611190246 861113 i
PDR ADOCK 05000454 l
P PDR l
[
o UNITED STATES
/n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5 *-
Mi-WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 j
- s.
Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50-455 FACILITY:
Byron Station, Units 1 and 2 LICENSEE:
Comonwealth Edison Company EVALUATION PERIOD:
November 1, 1985 to October 31, 1986 PROJECT MANAGER:
Leonard Olshan I.
INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of an evaluation of the licensee, Comonwealth Edison Company (CECO), in the functional area of licensing activities and other related areas.
It provides NRR's input to the SALP review process as described in NRC Manual Chapter 0516. The review covers the period November 1, 1985 to October 31, 1986.
The approach used for this evaluation was in accordance with Office Letter No.
44 which requires that each organization responsible for developing Safety Evaluation also provide a SALP input with their evaluation. Additional inputs were solicited for selected review areas of particular significance. The Project Manager also provided inputs on selected licensing actions.
In most cases the staff 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 licensee issue were assembled into a matrix which was then used, with appropriate weighting for the importance to safety of the licensing issue, to develop the overall evaluation of the licensee's performance.
This approach is consistent with NRC Manual Chapter 0516 which specifies that each functional area evaluated will be assigned a performance category based on a composite of a number of attributes. The single final rating is to be tempered with judgement as to the significance of the individual elements.
II. SUMPARY OF RESULTS Based on the approach described above, the performance of CECO in the functional area of licensing activities is rated Category 2.
III. CRITERIA The evaluation criteria given in NRC Manual Chapter 0516, Table 1, were used.
Weighting was used depending upon the individual licensing actions' importance to safety.
4 IV PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS Generally, the licensee's performance was evaluated using the criteria specified in Manual Chapter 0516.
l During the evaluation period there was a significant level of activity, especially toward the end of the period. The low power license for Byron 2, and a supporting SER supplement, were prepared for issuance on October 31, 1986.
I (Incompleteness of the plant delayed issuance of the license beyond this date.)
A record of meetings and official documents is included in Enclosure 1.
A.
Management Involvement and Control in Assuring Quality The overall rating for this attribute is 2.
The licensee's decision making is usually at a level that ensures adequate management review. The submittals needed to support licensing of Byron 2 were almost always timely, thorough and technically sound. However, as a result of the extensive effort involved in licensing Byron 2, some of the more routine items were not submitted on a timely basis. This should improve during the next rating period.
B.
Approach to Resoluation of Technical Issues from a Safety Standpoint The overall rating for this attribute is 2.
The licensee understands the technical issues and responses are generally sound and thorough. Conservatism is generally exhibited.
Although the rating period for this attribute is 2, the staff considers it a
" strong" 2 which should be a 1 in the next rating period. Only several instances kept the licensee from obtaining a 1.
C.
Responsive to NRC Initiatives The overall rating for this attribute is 1.
In the weeks prior to the issuance is Byron 2 low power license, the licensee responded to many NRC initiatives in a timely manner and proposed resolutions acceptable to the staff.
In nearly all other instances throughout the rating period, licensee reponses to NRC initiatives were timely, technically sound and thorough, and found acceptable by the NRC.
D.
Staffing The overall rating for this attribute is 1.
Key positions are identified and responsibilities and authorities are well defined. The staff that will startup Byron 2 has extensive experience on Byron 1; shift advisors, which were needed on Byron 1, are not needed on Byron 2.
The NRC anticipates that the well-trained and experienced staff on Byron 2 will result in a smooth startup of Byron 2 and continued smooth operation of both units.
f
E.
Training and Qualification Effectiveness The overall rating for attribute is 1.
The facility guard training and qualification plan is effectively implemented on a continuing basis at all levels of the security organization.
F.
Housekeeping and Control Room Behavior The overall rating for this area is 1.
Although housekeeping and control room behavior is discussed elsewhere in the NRC evaluation, NRR has continuing interest in this area since good housekeeping practices and formal behaviors in the control room indicate that the licensee takes pride in its facilities.
The licensee maintains a very professional atmosphere in the control room.
During a number of observations, the control room was clean and quiet. The conduct of the operating staff and staff crews has always been observed to be professional and helpful.
G.
Reporting and Analyis of Reportable Events The overall rating for this area is 2. for the basis for this rating.
V.
Conclusions Based on our evaluation of licensee activities, an overall rating of 2 is assessed for Commonwealth Edison's licensing performance for the period November 1, 1985 to October 31, 1986. We consider this a " strong" 2.
Now that Byron 2 has received its lower power license, the licensee should be able to devote more attention to resolving some lower priority items on a more timely basis. We anticipate that the licensee should be able to receive a 1 in licensing activities during the next rating period.
Enclosures:
1.
Record of Meetings and Official Documents 2.
Memorandum from Victor Benaroya to L. Olshan dated November 12,1986, "SALP Input - Byron Unit 1"
ENCLnstIRF 1 4
RECORD OF MEETINGS AND OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS 1.
NRR/ Licensee Meetings LCO Relaxation Program 12/3,6/85 ISI of Pumps and Valves 7/8,9/86 Hot leg Reduction Program 7/25/86 Diesel Generator Testing 10/21/86 2.
NRR Site Visits / Meetings SALP 2/3/86 Inadequate Core Cooling Audit 3/25/86 PM/ Resident 6/23-26/86 Management Readiness Visit for Unit 2 10/9/86 3.
Comission Meetings None 4.
Schedule Extension Granted Construction Completion Date Extension for Unit 2 4/24/86 5.
Reliefs Granted ASME Section XI Relief for Unit 2 10/29/86 6.
Exemptions Granted None 7.
License Amendments Issued Correct Typographical and Grammatical Errors (Amd. #2) 2/13/86 j
l Acceptance Criteria for RHR Pump Performance (Amd.#3) 6/6/86 Five Changes (Grid Plane Location, Weight of Uranium, etc.)(Amd.#4) 10/29/86 8.
Emergency Technical Specifications Issued None 9.
Orders Issued None l