ML20236T655
| ML20236T655 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/21/1997 |
| From: | Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Moseleybraun SENATE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236T625 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-98-156 NUDOCS 9807280315 | |
| Download: ML20236T655 (1) | |
Text
O l hdHD S(l./
4 6'#p<t:% UNITED STATES fl1.4'A &
p t; NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.4 WASHINGTON, D.C. 30606-0001
, O
%, , February 21, 1997 l CHARMAN
[The Honorable Carol Moseley-Braun United States Senate Washington, DC 20510
~
l
Dear Senator Moseley-Braun:
I am enclosing two speeches that I recently gave before the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) and the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO). I thought they may be of interest to you since they include issues in which you have been involved or are before your committee.
Please contact me if you wish to discuss these speeches or other topics of mutual interest.
Sincerely, Shirley Ann Jackson
Enclosures:
Ao stated 4
l 9807280315 990722 I PDR FOIA o KEMPER98-156 PDR L
0rwnlikHL y en% umTED STATES w
g
] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION wASMNG1rON, D.C. Sete6-emn
- April 1, 1997 The Honorable Carol Moseley-Braun ited States Senate Washington. DC 20510-1303
Dear Senator Moseley-Braun:
I am respondine to the letter you sent Dennis Rathbun March 10, 1997, asking that the U.S. Fuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) address concerns raised by one of your constituents. Mr. George Black, on February 20, 1997. Mr. Black asked you to encourage the NRC to enforce its safety regulations in relation )
to Commonwealth Edison Company's (Comed) nuclear plants.
Performance of Comed plants has been of concern to the NRC for some time, and three plants in particular. Dresden. LaSalle and Zion, are currently receiving si,gnificant NRC oversight. These three plants are on the NRC's
" watch list of plants that warrant increased NRC attention from both the Headquarters office and the Regional office (LaSalle and Zion were placed on the watch list in January 1997 and Dresden has been on the list since January 1992). The increased attention consists of additional inspections increased monitoring of licensee performance, management meetings between licensee and NRC management, and site visits by senior NRC management. These plants will remain on the list until they have demonstrated consistently improved safety performance.
Because Dresden had been on the watch list since 1992. the NRC conducted an independent safety inspection (ISI) in 1996 to determine whether Comed was sufficiently improving the overall safety performance. The team found that i rovements had been made in all areas inspected, but identified some si nificant weaknesses in the accessibility and maintenance of design in ormation and engineering activities. The NRC issued a confirmatory action letter on November 21. 1996, to confirm the actions Comed is taking to addrest these deficiencies. Both units at Dresden are currently operating, following a number of extended maintenance outages to correct material condition problems.
LaSalle is currently in an extended shutdown, due in part to findings by the NRC and an external review group commissioned by Comed. Comed has developed a restart action plan to address and correct identified weaknesses. No date has been announced for restarting either of the units. Zion remains shut down since an incident on February 21, 1997, which involved inappropriate operator actions during shutdown of the facility. The NRC sent an augmented inspection team (AIT) to evaluate the event. On the basis of the AIT's conclusions and Comed's assessment of the event. Zion will remain shut down until the performance problems are satisfactorily addressed. On February 25, 1997, the iRC issued a confirmatory restarting Zion. it (1) y action letter to Comed which requires that, beforediscuss wi of the event and (2) detail the corrective actions taken. The NRC has formed joint regional and Headquarters plant performance review panels for both LaSalle and Zion: these panels hold monthly public meetings with Comed to discuss performance improvement.
. k,
____ _2T_h WOYP W A9P_-_ .__ J
Senator Moseley-Braun -
2-1 J
In addition, as a result of continuing inconsistent sites, the NRC sent a letter to Comed on January 27 performance at the Comed 1997 submit information regarding its ability to safely. operate its six nuclear stations while sustaining performance improvement at each site. Comed's response was received on March 29, 1997. If the NRC staff determines that the information submitted does not ensure that Comed can operate all six stations -
suspending, or revoking the o>erating license for one or more plants. Suchsafely.
s NRC could take such actions as tie concern that the NRC has in ensuring that these plants are operated safely. A public meeting between Comed and the Commission to discuss Comed's response to the NRC's letter of January 27, 1997, is scheduled for April 25, 1997. For your information. I am enclosing a copy of that letter, as well as the letter informin management meeting.g Comed of the results of the January 1997 senior The extra scrutiny that the Comed plants are receiving is in addition to the routine inspections at each site, such as daily observations by the NRC resident. inspectors assigned at each plant. Any violations of NRC regulations are addressed in the inspection reports and require a written response from the licensee. The NRC ensures that appropriate corrective actions are taken
=before closing out each violation.
Considering the increased attention to the Comed sites, especially to Dresden.
LaSalle, and Zion. I am confident that these facilities will continue to receive sufficient NRC inspection and oversi has enforced, and will continue to enforce. ght. .I assure you 1ts regulations thatComed at the the NRC sites. I appreciate your constituent's interest and trust this response addresses his concerns.
Sincerely.
L. J ph-Callan Executive Director ,
for Operations '
Docket Nos. STN 50-456. STN 50-547 STN 50-454. STN 50-455. 50-237, 50-249, 50-373, 50-374. 50-254 -
50-265. 50-295, 50-304
Enclosures:
Letters from H. Thompson, NRC. to J. O'Connor. Comed dtd 01/27/97 L
i I
. _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____________._____.__-._________._______-.____________-_______________________-._____u
UNITED STATES f j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION wasmweton. o.c. mess.een January 27, 1997 k.....
I Nr. James J. O'Connor Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Caumonwealth Edison Company P.O. Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 ,
Dear Mr. O'Connor:
1 On January 14,15, and 17 1997, NRC senior managers met to evaluate the auclear safety performance, of operating reactors, fuel facilities, and other {'
materials licensees. The NRC conducts this meeting semiannually to determine if the safety performance of various licensees exhibits sufficient weaknesses '
l to warrant increased NRC attention or if it is trending adversely and requires steps be taken to communicate concerns to the utility's president or board of directors. At the January 1997 Senior Management Neeting Nuclear Power Station, the Zion Generating Station, and LaSalle the(SWI), the Dresden County {
Station were discussed.
The Dresden Nuclear Power Station was placed on the NRC Watch List for the second time in January 1992 and remains a Category 2 plant. Plants in this category have been identified as having weaknesses that warrant increased NRC attention until the licensee demonstrates a period of improved performance. A summary of NRC discussions related to Dresden follows.
Dresden has continued to demonstrate sustained good performance in the area of plant operations. Maintenance and surveillance activities have been conducted at an. adequate lev % ; however, problems and weaknesses in work control continue. The Independent Safety Inspection (ISI) conducted last fall Wntified significant weaknesses in design basis retrievability and egineering calculation control. Both r,hort-ters and long-term corrective actions for the engineering weaknesses are being implemented as outlined in the November 21, 1996, Confirmatory Action Letter (CAL). On January 13,1997 Dresden provided the NRC an interim responsetotheISIreportfindings. A detailed response to each of the ISI findings is planned by February 26, 1997. Plant support activities continued to provide good support to operations
'and maintenance, but routine radiation worker performance problems still occurred.
The NRC recognizes that significant management changes and improvement efforts were initiated to improve operational performance and the material condition of the facility. However, continued management attention is needed to assure those improvement efforts are sustained and effective at Dresden. The IRC will continue to closely monitor station performance to ENCLOSURE 1 N M50'fN M _____ _ ._
. .t
'#. Mr. James J. O'Connor 2 determine if lasting change is being made. This includes continued evaluation and independent assessment of Dresden's corrective actions outlined in the Dresden CAL, and observing performance as Units I and 3 are operated together for a period of time and the Unit 3 outage conducted in the spring of this year.
The 21en Generating Station was placed on the NRC Watch List as a Category 2 plant. A summary of NRC discussions related to Zion follows.
Zion Station was placed on the NRC Watch List following the January 1991 Siti and remained on the Watch List until January 1993. Between 1993 and 1996, further improvement in facility performance was limited. Because of concerns with operational performance and material condition, Zion Station was discussed again at both the January and June 1996 SMMs. During the last six months, examples of personnel errors and configuration control problems continued to occur. In addition, various plant equipment problems continued to challenge operators and efforts to improve material condition were hindered by the limited effectiveness of work planning and control processes, quality of routine work activities, and operator acceptance of equipment work-arounds.
Weaknesses were also identified in the performance of specific engineering activities, such as evaluation of some facility design 1 modifications and evaluation and resolution of certain equipment I deficiencies. Radiation protection procedure and radiation work permit aMherence deficiencies contributed to a decline in performance. . !
l' The NRC recognizes that significant management changes have been made at Zion, and that a number of performance improvement efforts have been initiated, including work stand-downs, augmented management review of I operational activit' es and engineering work, radiation protection !
planning improvements, enhanced communication of management expectations for staff performance, and commitment of significant resources to identify the root causes for current performance weaknesses. The effectiveness of these recent management changes and improvement initiatives has yet to be fully demonstrated. The NRC will focus attention on assessing the effectiveness of Zion Station improvement initiatives and action plans, with emphasis on problem identification i and corrective action programs, to assure that sustained improvement is )
achieved. J l
The LaSalle County station was placed on the NRC Watch List as a Category 2 l Plant. A summary of NRC discussions related to LaSalle follows. l LaSalle has been discussed at each Stei from January 1994 through I June 1996 due to varying performance issues. Following the June l 1996 $lti, a safety-significant service water event occurred which
' ~
l.*, Mr. James J. O'Connor 3 l indicated that significant performance weaknesses continued to exist in a number of areas. In addition, substantial NRC
, involvement was required to ensure that the station took conservative and comprehensive corrective actions in evaluating thi full extent of t sis event. Since the service water event,
, operations perfomance has been characterized by a number of personnel errors resulting in inoperable safety-related equipsont and the loss of configuration control for important plant systems.
Problems with plant equipment continued and were indicative of weaknesses in maintenance performance. performance problems in the engineering area were demonstrated by a number of weak or inaccurate root cause evaluations and non-conservative operability determinations; a tolerance of material condition deficiencies; and at times, a failure to use the design control process properly.
In September, both LaSalle units were shutdown; Unit I to repair a
- turbine control valve and Unit 2 for a refueling outage. In December, a decision was made to extend the outages for both units to address performance issues revealed by the service water event, NRC findings, and station self-assessment initiatives. The NRC recognizes the initiatives to address hardware issues and human performance deficiencies through implementation of a restart action plan and longer-tern improvement plans. The commitment by corporate management to keep both units shutdown until identified performance isses have been appropriately addressed, indicates a recognition and understanding of the significance of the problems that exist at LaSalle. In addition, the NRC recognizes that some significant management and organizational changes have been made at LaSalle station. However, the effectiveness of t;)ese changes and improvement initiatives have not yet become evident. The NRC will focus attention on assessing the effectiveness of LaSalle Station improvement initiatives and action plans to assure that sustained improvement is achieved.
Mr. A. Bill Beach, the NRC Region !!! Administrator, has discussed the bases for our conclusions with regard to the Drerden Nuclear Power Station, the Zion Generating Station, and the LaSalle County Station with members of your staff.
An Igic Commission meeting, open to the pub 1' . has been scheduled to be held in the Commissioners' Conference Room in Rodville, Maryland, on January 29, 1997, at 10:00 a.m. to review the results of the latest meeting of NRC senior-annagers.
In relation to the preceding discussion regarding the performance of the Dresden. Zion, and LaSalle plants, we are requesting, under separate cover, information that will allow the NRC to determine what actions, if any, should be taken to assure Commonwealth Edison Company can safely operate its six nuclear stations while sustaining performance improvement at each site.
I
_ - _ --- - ----- - --- - - - - . - _ o
'* . Mr. James J. O'Connor 4 W you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to
. call me.
Sincerely.
. Thompso , J A g Executi e Di- or Operations .
Docket Mos. 50-237, 50-249 50-295, 50-304 50-373, 50-374 cc: See next page 4
i 4
\ UNffs0 STATES
.e
- [ -
wuct.aAn naoutAvonY COMMISSION masenne1ron, e.c. samaan
\*.* January 27, 1997 Mr. James J. O'Connor '
Chaiman and Chief Executive Officer Commonwealth Edison Company p.0. Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION PURSUANT TO 10 CFR 50.54(f) REGARDING 5AFETY PERF0 MANCE AT CO M ONWEALTH EDIS0N COMPANY NUCLEAR STATIONS
Dear Mr. O'Connor:
l The up' rpose of this letter is to require infomation that will allow the .
U. 5. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to determine what actions, if any, should be taken to assure Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed) can safely operate its six nuclear stations while sustaining performance improvement at each site, as described in more detail below.
Backaround The cyclical safety performance of Comed nuclear stations has long concerned the Commission and Ntc staff. In the last 10 years, LaSalle 1/2 were placed on the NRC's watch list from April 1986 to October 1986. Dresden 2/3 were placed on the watch list from June 1987 until December 1988 and were returned to the watch list in January 1992 and remain on the watch list. Zion 1/2 were placed on the watch list from January 1991 until January 1993. Due to declining performance, trending letters were issued to LaSalle 1/2 in January 1994 and June 1994 and to Quad Cities 1/2 in January 1994, June 1994 and January 1995. In addition, as a result of perfomance concerns discussed during the January 1997 Senior Management Meeting, LaSalle 1/2 and Zion 1/2 are being placed back on the watch list. .
The NRC's concerns regarding inconsistent and marginal plant perfomance at your facilities have been expressed in a number of letters to you associated with the results of Senior Management Meetings and in Chaiman Jackson's letter to you dated March 22, 1996. Inaddition,concernsregardingCosEd's ability to establish lasting and effective programs that resu t in sustained performance improvement were discussed during meetings between Comed and the Eeunission on rebruary 28, 1994, November 16, 1995 and May 13, 1996.
! Dresden, Quad Cities and LaSalle had similar weaknesses and their ' performance did not improve following~a major reorganization that took place ttroughout late 1992 and early 1993. performance at Zion taproved for a while after the j but the imoroving trend then slowed or !
plant stepped was n uoved following the from the dual extended watch un list,it outage that ended in Spring 1994. -
perfomance at Byron and Braidwood, the newer Comed plants, remained I consistently better than the other Comed plants. ,
l ENC WSURE 2 I
979.2/s/L 343
J. O'Connor Nistoricall , major apparent weaknesses that led to the poor performance included: ( ) lack of effective management attention and application of resources; 2 weak corporate oversight of nuclear operations; (3 poor problem recogn)ition and failure to ensure lasting corrective actio)ns; (4) lack of fromadequate engineering experiences at Comed support; and other and uti (5)l1 ties.an inability or reluctance to learn Beginning in Igg 3, Comed began bringing in outside personnel and changed senior and mid-level plant and corporate management and implemented significant organizational changes. Additional focus was placed on oversight of nuclear operations. Comprehensive improvement plans were develo ed for Dresden, Quad Cities and LaSalle. A major restructuring of the Comed design engineering function moved most of the resources previously allocated from the corporate office to the sites. Additional focus was placed on annagement and leadership, accountability, the problem identification and corrective action processes, material condition improvement, work control, and radiation protection. As a result of these and other corporate initiatives, including additional senior management changes in Igg 6, improvement has been seen in many areas at Dresden and Quad Cities; however while focusing on these facilities, significant performance decline has been observed at both LaSalle and Zion.
The cyclical safety performance history of the Comed nuclear facilities, as outlined above, raises questions regarding Comed's ability to operate six auclear stations while sustaining performance improvement at each site.
Astian The NRC has concluded that it requires information that will allow the NRC to determine what actions, if any, should be taken to assure Comed can safely operate its six nuclear stations while sustaining improvement at each of the sites. Therefore, you are required, pursuant to Section 182(a) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and 10 CFR 50.54(f), to sube9t a response to this letter within 60 days of its receipt. Your response must be written and signed under oath or affirmation.
please submit the original copy of your response to the NRC Document Control Desk, with a copy to the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, and l
to the NRC's Region III Administrator.
! The following information is required:
(a) Information explaining why NRC should have confidence in CosEd's ability to operate six muclear stations while sustaining performance improvement at each site.
(b) Criteria that you have established or plan to establish to measure perfomance in light of the concerns identified above and your proposed actions if those criteria are not met.
e' . l e.
J. O'Connor <
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the lutC's " Rules of Practice ' a copy of this letter and your response will be placed in the NRC public hument Room located at the Gelman Building,1120 L Street Inf., Washington, DC, and in the local public document rooms for your facilities.
Sincerely.
O 4
(Thompson
. r.
~
Executive to for Operations Docket Nos. STN 50-454, STN 50-455, STN 50-456, STN 50-457; 50-237, 50-249, 50-373, 50-374, 50-254, 50-265; 50-295, 50-304 cc: See next page 1
l I
I