ML20236M160
| ML20236M160 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 08/03/1987 |
| From: | Davis A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Sylvia B DETROIT EDISON CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236M161 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8708100491 | |
| Download: ML20236M160 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000341/1987017
Text
- .
.
- _ - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _
_
'
<
-
. UNITED STATES
J
- g* *'% \\
NUCLEAn REGULATORY cOMMISslON
/-
[
h
REGION lit
f'*
7. ' N'l
(~j
g
corn etem itusois som
j
.....
L
AUG 0 31987
Docket No. 50-341
The' Detroit Edison Company
ATTN:
B. Ralph Sylvia
]
i
Group Vice President
!
Nuclear Operations
6400 North Dixie Highway
i
Newport, MI 48166
i
l
Gentlemen:
Enclosed for your review, prior to 'our scheduled meeting on August 24, 1987,
is the SALP 8 Board Report for the Fermi 2 Nuclear Plant, covering the period
of April 1, 1986, through March 31, 1987,
In accordance with NRC policy, I have reviewed the SALP Board recommendations
and concur with their ratings. Highlights of the report are set forth below:
1.
Category I ratings were given in the functional areas of Emergency
Preparedness and Startup Testing.
2.
Category 3 ratings were given in the functional areas of Plant
Operations, Surveillance, and Training and Qualification Effectiveness.
The assignment of three Category 3 ratings is indicative of the continued need
for increased licensee management attention.
Specific areas of concern
,
supporting these Category 3 ratings include numerous personnel errors and
j
equipment failures, equipment being improperly returned to service, failure to
i
recognize appropriate Technical Specification actions, surveillance procedure
deficiencies, and improper implementation of the requalification training
program.
Fermi remained shut down at the beginning of the assessment period until
August 1986, because of management, operational, and equipment problems.
The plant. resumed operations in a phased startup program which included
increased NRC monitoring and NRC concurrence before exceeding power levels of
5, 20, 50, and 75 percent. On December 12, 1986, I notified you that because
of continuing operational problems, the plant would be held at the 20 percent
power level until it had experienced a sustained period of steady state
operation.
(The 20 percent restriction was later removed after a period of
satisfactory performance, and the 50 percent level was reached prior to the .
conclusion of the assessment period.) As you know, I have not yet authorized
operation at power levels greater than 50 percent.
f g uO
geW! S"$h'
< /,
4
"
0
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _
e
'
Thef Detreit Edison Company
2
The enclosed report reflects plant activities during an NRC imposed shutdown
period and during the resumption of the-startup testing program. The type and
number of events and performance which have resulted in the Category 3 ratings,
also resulted in the extended period of time when the plant was not authorized
to proceed through and complete the phased startup program.
I recognize that considerable effort has been undertaken by Detroit Edison to
improve performance at the plant, before, during and after the assessment
period. This included the development of several improvement programs and the
recruitment and putting into place a new Group Vice President, a new
Engineering Vice Prt.sident, a new Offsite Review Board Chairman and a new
Director of Nuclear Security. After this SALP period, you have shifted key
personnel to further strengthen the management of station activities.
You have
also taken steps, including instituting a personnel accountability program, to
improve overall operations. These efforts appear positive, although it is
probably too soon for them to have resulted in broad, demonstrated
improvements. NRC will continue to scrutinize your plant activities closely
and evaluate the effectiveness of these programs.
While you will have sufficient opportunity to present your comments at the
meeting on August 24, 1987, we request you also make written comments within
30 days after the meeting. We will evaluate any written comments and provide
you with our conclusions relative to them. Additionally, you are requested to
respond in writing specifically addressing corrective actiors planned to
improve your performance in the areas of Plant Operations, surveillance, and
Training and Qualification Effectiveness. This response should include
specific actions and dates by which these actions will be completed.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2,
Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the SALP
Board Report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
Should you have any questions concerning the SALP Report, we would be pleased
to discuss them with you.
Sincerely,
aaf%
A. Bert Davis
Regional Administrator
g
Enclosure: SALP 8 Board Report
No. 50-341/87017
See Attached Distribution
[-
(.
..
<
.
l4
The Detroit Edison Company -
3
Distribution
cc w/ enclosure:
S. R. Frost, Licensing
P.'A. Marquardt, Corporate
Legal Department
DCS/RSB (RIDS)
Licensing Fee Management Branch
Resident Inspector, RIII
Ronald Callen, Michigan
Public Service Commission
Harry H. Voight, Esq.
,
Michigan Department of
Public Health
Monroe County Office of
Civil Preparedness
J. M. Taylor, Deputy Executive
Director for Regional Operations
T. E. Murley, Director, NRR
Regional Administrators
!
RI, RII, RIV, RV
L. W. Zech, Chairman
F. M. Bernthal, Commissioner
T..M. Roberts, Commissioner
K. M. Carr, Commissioner
J. J. Stefano, NRR Project Manager
F. Maraglia, NRR Division Director
J. Lieberman, Director, Office of
Enforcement
D. E. Hickman, SALP Coordinator, NRR
l
RIII PRR
!
RIII SGA
State-Liaison Officer, State
of Michigan
INP0
DRP, DRS, and DRSS Section Chiefs
and Branch Chiefs
J
F. B. Ali,' Emergency Planning
Ontario -
G. Desbien, Canadian Consulate
General
K. Shikaze, Environment Canada
l
j
l
- _ - - - - . _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_a