Text

Forwards List of Attendees & Viewgraphs Provided by Util During 871211 Meeting W/Nrc Re Organizational Changes, Initiatives & Nrc/Util Interface During Team Insp
	ML20237E408
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear
Issue date:	12/18/1987
From:	Callan L; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:	Campbell G; ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT CO.
References
	NUDOCS 8712280316
	Download: ML20237E408 (38)
	v • d • e

1, o^

k..

' In Reply Refer To:

DEC 18 K

. Dockets: 50-313 50-368 Arkansas Power & Light Company ATTN: Mr. Gene Campbell Vice President, Nuclear Operations-P.O. Box 551 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203 Gentlemen:

This documents our meeting on December 11, 1987. At the meeting, you discussed organizational changes. initiatives, and.the NRC/AP&L interface -

during a team inspection.

We have enclosed a list of attendees and a copy of the material you.provided during our discussion. We found the meeting to be beneficial.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely.

Original Signed By -

L. I. Callan -

L. J. Callan, Director Division of Reactor Projects

Enclosure:

As stated Arkansas Nuclear One ATTN:.J. M. Levine,' Director Site Nuclear Operations P.O. Box 608 Russellville, Arkansas 72801 Arkansas Radiation Control Program Director.

bec to DMB-(IE45) - DRS & DRP bec distrib. by RIV:

RRI R. D. Martin, RA-RPSB-DRSS

Sectiori Chief'(DRP/A)

Lisa Shea, RM/ALF

RIV File

DRP

RSTS Operator

Project Engineer, DRP/A

R. Hall-

G. Dick,),RRProjectManager

DRS RIV:D DRP

[('[c'--

-JJaud 1

'LJCallan

\\),/()/7 p/(l/87 y

8712280316 871218 I

b gDR ADOCK 05000313 PDR D

LIST OF ATTENDEES

_AP&L T. G. Campbell, Vice President - Nuclear Operations J. Levine, Director, Site Nuclear Operations NRC R. D. Martin, Regional Administrator L. J. Callan, Director, Division of Reactor Projects J. Milhoan, Director, Division of Reactor Safety R. L. Bangart, Director Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards J. P. Jaudon, Chief, Reactor Project Section A G. Dick, Project Manager, NRR 4

I l

e w f ct t

ary tfi s s

l henn n

ntnor D

k/w gthi e

enato e

iScm c

meMat i

tm l a s

ed v

r.TA L

iueul i

mcugu e P.

C moseg e

OV-R oDsRe v

R S

C I

R s

t l

e.

r o

l e) g o

r o

tl n

p g t gr Ia i

p nn n nt t

l u

ei o i n ti u S f

g l r C

ro ep d

sf nsee eC ga e

gea iteegE e

g dC h

nvt rsDnn ng n

u c

iiS ey/ii n i n i

B4 S

tt g

eldgr o

gi n

/

n ace n

naenei nw n

rN a5 mer i

inoEet gE a a

eE l

ijo r

n r gal nan r

a F gl rI nrsOc l

dD Pgttbt g e n

elitil D e

ie E yR a g n r a /

l snlOt rioE/e s n t

cneecg tio eganp/sr c

hi r e eiE m ei n s

s anyrdiYausaD c t r k gn e n ptli g

af rn unri 4

n eaoalrit t E

lSChitgcf 1

t ruaoun lSoo e

toPWBn5P Cge c

cvsnea g

nc a

t N-u ei nEl r d

o A-P-

- - i c

l MCI ED u

C S

B s

s en n

sn o

ot t o t

in i

ni e t te ma am et d a r

ce l

r i

e r

i g e e D p t e ef e e p O

n g scin rO e

a e nnde P

v e l

n oaoM r

t P e inM e a i

M te e

c e S

attg il rnno V c D

eiatC u

N pal uC N

A OMPOh Mnn g

e n

t c

i r nl n o ao C

p rr S

oa p

y ut P

M t

il u

t sn i

so t r tP S

n l

AC n o

/ a e

ap ry l

a pm h yt c g a u

yy l

G tt P u r stsnnc i

S eiieii ii a

ll h

grngnn

- uirih aa C

Scmeac uu QQ Pednre OSAETT s

ge nc gii2 nrv C

iert gR reei nP enSne iS ei Ur t r ngg o n en inndt aee gEina l nm n ran Pir Ere i gi oeid na ttn r

Eh ncito C

aagio enmC lPREi.

.g I

e' ARKANSAS POWER AND LIGHT AND NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION IV MANAGEMENT MEETING DECEMBER 11, 1987 1

0 MEETING AGENDA I. ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES o

Design Engineering o

Onsite Engineering / Systems Engineering o

Licensing o

Plant Manager / Plant Modifications a

Plant Safety, Committee / Safety Review Committee o

Corrective Action Incident Reporting System II. MAJOR INITIATIVES o

10CFR50.59 Pragram/ Licensing. Document Research System o

Safety Analysis Reports Upgrade o

Isometric Drawing update Project o

Control Room Habitability Review-0 Plant Modification Process III. APGL/NRC INTERFACE DURING REACTOR BUILDING ELEVATED TEMPERATURE INSPECTION

O B

St f

e PLANT SAFETY COMMITTEE

PLANT SAFETY COMMITTEE OBJECTIVES AND REASONS FOR CHANGES o

Increase review effectiveness by focusing available resources on items-of significance.

O Continued efforts to provide greater procedural detail and to upgrade procedure format and content have resulted in up to 1000 procedure changes per year per unit which require PSC review.

o Increased emphasis on corrective action systems has increased the number of Reports of. Abnormal Conditions (RACs) to approximately 1000 per year.

RACs are currently reviewed by PSC twice (for deportability and corrective action closecut).

o PSC meetings currently require approximately 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months per week during routine operation and.

greater than 12 hours1.388889e-4 days 0.00333 hours 1.984127e-5 weeks 4.566e-6 months per week during peak outage periods to fulfill review requirements.

PLANT SAFETY COMMITTEE PROPOSED CHANGES TO INCREASE EFFECTIVENESS AND TO REFLECT REORGANIZATION o

Chairmanship changed from Manager, Special Projects to General Manager, Plant Support a

Technical Analysis to be represented by General Manager, Plant Support a

Licensing to be represented in lieu of Manager, Special Projects o

Procedure review changed from all revisions to safety-related procedures to plant administrative procedures and those procedure revisions requiring a safety evaluation per 10CFR50.59 o

Review of all RACs replaced by review of only significant events determined by new corrective action system o

Technical Specification change has been submitted to implement these changes as necessary (not required for RAC review changes) i i

a B

e g e

SAFETY REVIEN COMMITTEE 1

l l

6' SAF'sY REVIEW COMMITTEE OBJECTIVES AND REASONS FOR CHANGE I

o Increase awareness of the purpose and mission of the SRC o

Improve the committee's effectiveness in distilling information down to significant issues and adverse trends o

Strengthen the committee's advisory role for Senior Nuclear Management i

o Change the membership to broaden the representation and ensure appropriate authority to initiate corrective action 0

Ensure the continued independence of the committee i

't I

SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE PROPOSED CHANGES TO INCREASE EFFECTIVENESS AND TO REFLECT ORGANIZATION O

Prepare a Mission Statement for the SRC and distribute to Nuclear Managers and Supervisors a

Revise the Charter to take better advantage of subcommittees, Nuclear Quality input, and various management reports i

o Senior Nuclear Management will participate on the committee - first meeting with the new membership planned for January 1988 I

o Membership change concurrent with the Nuclear Operations reorganization o

Two outside consultant members being added (MSU will also provide an outside member)

I o

Subcommittees will be chaired by committee members who are not responsible for the program area under review i

o No more than a minority of those members making up a quorum at meetings may hold positions with line l

responsibility for unit operation 1

SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNED MEMBERSHIP o

CHAIRMAN Vice President, Nuclear Operations 1

o ALTERNATE CHAIRMAN Executive Director, Site Nuclear Operations a

SECRETARY Manager, Nuclear Oversight / Review a

ADDITIONAL MEMBERS General Manager, Plant Support Plant Manager General Manager, Design Engineering

Manager, Licensing i

General Manager, Nuclear Quality Corporate Health Physicist l

MSU Representative Consultant 1

Consultant l

SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE STANDING SUBCOMMITTEES SAFETY EVALUATION (50,59)

SUBCOMMITTEE o

Chairman:

Manager, Licensing a

Members:

Manager, Design Engineering Superintendent, Nuclear Engineering QA Superintendent Consultant - Engineering Background PSC OVERSIGHT SUBCOMMITTEE o

Chairman:

Manager, Nuclear Oversight / Review a

Members:

General Manager, Plant Support (PSC Chairman)

Consultant

-Operations Background Corporate. Health Physicist Member, Corporate Oversight Staff QUALITY AUDIT PROGRAM SUBCOMMITTEE j

o Chairman:

General Manger, Design Engineering a

Members:

General Manager, Nuclear Quality Superintendent Operations Assessment-Plant Manager MSU Representative

O 9

0 8 e e

e' CORRECTIVE ACTION INCIDENT REPORTING SYSTEM l

l l

CORRECTIVE ACTION INCIDENT REPORTING SYSTEM PURPOSE o

Simplify incident reporting by combining existing systems l

0 Provide for tiered review based on significance of events o

Assure better management control by segregating and identifying needed corrective actions to appropriate management levels SCOPE OF CONSOLIDATION o

Reports of Abnormal Conditions o

Non-Conformance Reports a

Potential Nuclear Safety Concerns l

0 Design Deficiency Reports a

Security Infraction Reports a

Results of various trending programs (adverse trends) o Additional scope to be considered after experience gained with new system i

1

CORRECTIVE ACTION INCIDENT REPORTING SYSTEM EMPHASIZES CORRECTIVE ACTION ACHIEVEMENT' o

Tiered Priority System o

Defined-Requirements for Root Cause Analysis a

Centralizes Responsibility STREAMLINES REPORTING PROCESS o

Relieves PSC time burden due to non-significant events o

Provides definitive thresholds for PSC review PROTOTYPE PHASE-IN PERIOD o

Initial operation in parallel with existing system January to April 1988 o

Monthly incident lists and management reports

h I

84 9

e' l

10CFR50.59 REVIEW PROGRAM AND LICENSING DOCUMENT RESEARCH SYSTEM G

4

.h

10CFR50.59 PROGRAM EXTENSIVE IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTED IN JULY 1987-10CFR50.59 POLICY' DOCUMENT DEVELOPED AND APPROVED UNDER DIRECTION OF SAFETY COMMITTEES COMPETENCY BASED TRAINING PROGRAM DEVELOPED 10CFR50.59 REVIEWS PERFORMED BY PERSONNEL WH0:

0 Meet experience requirements set by policy a

Have completed training and passed examination o

Have qualifications and examination results reviewed by PSC or SRC (Certification) o Receive requalification training and decertification (2 year intervals)

)

LICENSING DOCUMENT RESEARCH SYSTEM PRIMARY PURPOSE To provide a search capability of Licensing Basis Documents for 10CFR50.59 reviewers to utilize in evaluations SYSTEM DESIGN 0

IBM local area network with remote access a

Uniquely designed for-AP&L for compatibility with existing document storage systems

o. Allows search of all indexed documents for any word, phrase, or combinations OPERATIONAL NOVEMBER 1987

LICENSING DOCUMENT RESEARCH SYSTEM DOCUMENTS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE o

Safety Analysis Reports o

Operating Licenses o

Technical Specifications o

Original Safety Evaluations a

TS and OL Safety Evaluation Reports o

Emergency Plan i

o Guality Assurance Manual for Operations a

FUTURE DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE o

NRC correspondence o

Design related documents L

a

N O

ITAR CE I

V N R N

U E K O N

MS M

M RI K O T

O O A RI E

C T

WT O A T

S S

i WTS L

b Y

A KM S

I C T IS SI 5

I PD H

O - 1 1

i C

R K

R A

.S RE O

RC E

IHT N

OLPN S

O AI G

T R

E CR P N

E 0 C R

C.

I 0 EKM E E R

N R

0I b

T 8

LV A

T NSI 0 I

R N

E SG D 8 F

N M A 4

E E

R E

N M S

K M

RIC R A

S E

O EH T T

L U

SP N AAI A

R LR C

P C

G O

O L

D 7 L 0 A Kb 0 C G

. I S G N

S T I PD1 M

N I

O S

N N

N K O N

E N

RI K O T

O C

I RI O A T

T WT AR O A I

L CE I V WT S

N R S

U E MS M

O C

,f l

a r

e I

i 1

e' i

SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT UPGRADE PROJECT l

l 1

1 I

l e

I l

\\

l i

l l

)

1

SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT UPGRADE PROJECT BACKGROUND o

Initiated by APSL in March 1987 as one of the 1987 Organizational Goals l

0 Project has 4 major objectives Improve the 50.59 safety evaluation process Provide consistency of descriptions within the SAR Improve grammatical content and overall quality of the SAR Add appropriate NRC commitments that fall within 50.59 reviews to the SAR O

Program utilizes both in-house and outside expertise 25 APGL personnel, 22 contractor personnel 10,000 manhours Total contract costs - $600,000

l

)

I SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT UPGRADE' PROJECT I(

N,-

g

(

j METHODOLOGY i

g

)!

Inputsolicitedbaachapter4-b'y-chaptarfbasics o

i i

y 3

f p

c l

i Comments discusyktin mt/ltidisciplip revde.W o

i.

j meetingsandresraadchedebycontbact,or,

.i o

7 3

ItemsidentifDdaspotentialh'yserious j

are reviewed expeditiously 6,o l,

i Itgms that cannot be resolved thgough y

,e g.

reviewsarereferredbacktoAPGffor further<hendling A

L' - '

\\

l'v' o

leview packages for ea(ch d,'oposed SAR f~..'l:

r t

!.mnravemenfWillbePE!YibWed,bybotkPSI

('

i v-r 3nd,SRC

/; s y,e, y>

,y e

/

10CfR50.I69 review,to be veicified or performed M

0 0

for ChanQes

~

(,' $

I, A,

Ii

' App'dedSARimprovemedsyillbefactored 3,

tI 0

finto th'e annual update - July 1988 submittal.(

4

],

-. (1 e

s,, p.

c t;)y j

i'

)

+

5' r

(-

,j e., g

-(

g..

k

'}.

i

_y

. [)h eijY k

,(-) ik

./, ;

rk.

~'

SAFET( ANALYSIS REPORT UPGRADE PROJECT L.,--

EXPECTED RESULTS/ BENEFITS o

Facility changes that have not been adeouately addressed in the SAR will be identifietDahd incorporated 1

o Greater detail in SAR will expedite review process for future f acility changes o

Conflicting and confusing information in the SAR will be corrected o

SAR update process improvements will be made based on lessons lerned l

CURRENT STAlUS i

All chapter review ma' tings have been completed o

e o

Researr[honcommentsiscoderway a

First review package ready for APGL internal e

reviewdy'endof1967

'1 y

o Project-on schedule for July 1986' submittal s

i i

SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT UPGRADE PROJECT PROJECT RESULTS REPORTING MECHANISMS TO NRC 0

Annual SAR update report required by

. iOCFR50.71 (e) o Annual submittallof 10CFR50.59 evaluation l

summaries o

Any reports required per 10CFR50.72 and 10CFR50.73 e

M

^' ~'

I i

l ISOMETRIC DRAWING UPDATE PROJECT e

ISOMETRIC DRAWING UPDATE PROJECT OBJECTIVE o

Improve maintainability and quality of multiple drawings depicting as-built configuration a

Resolve recurring pipe isometric and support discrepancies o

Reduce high incidence of pipe support configuration deviations PLAN o

Walkdown safety-related systems o

Establish validated pipe isometric and hanger drawings o

Validate with qualifying design calculations SCOPE o

Approximately 3500 piping isometric drawings o

Approximately 5000 hanger drawings O

Supporting documentation I

ISOMETRIC DRAWING UPDATE PROJECT PROJECT SEQUENCE o

Assemble all drawings and supporting documentation o

Combine information into marked-up isometric and hanger sketches o

Resolve documentation discrepancies o

Perf arm walkdowns, verify, and as-built:

1 Piping / configuration Line designation and pipe size Columns and floor elevations Components and locations Dimensions within tolerances Floor and wall penetrations Hanger locations, type, structure, loads Hanger anchor bolts Bill of materials l

ISOMETRIC DRAWING UPDATE PROJECT PROJECT SEQUENCE (CONTINUED) o Develop validated as-built, marked-up drawings o

Initiate drawing changes o

Design Engineering compares walkdown package to qualifying calculations o

Major deviations identified during sequence will be evaluated for severity and effect on system operability as found.

Completed system walkdowns will be used to evaluate the cumulative effect of minor deviations.

ISOMETRIC DRAWING UPDATE PRDJECT FINAL PRODUCT o

As-built drawing with appropriate information merged a

Assurance that isometric and hanger sketches match qualifying calculations o

New drawings eliminating illegible originals SCHEDULE o

2 to 3 year effort to complete no later than December 31, 1990 o

95,000 t0 134,000 estimated manhours o

Total estimated costs of $3.4 to $4.7 million t

i e

e 9

g e'

CONTROL ROOM HABITABILITY REVIEW 1

l l

l

CONTROL ROOM HABITABILITY REVIEW REVIEW GROUP o

Established November 1987 o

Membership from Engineering, Licensing, Operations PURPOSE o

To assess the issues identified in the NRC-

)

survey. report for ANO-1 and AND-2 control

)

rooms O

Assure compliance o

Perform a detailed review of the systems to identify areas where improvements could be made

)

i i

i

CONTROL ROOM HABITABILITY REVIEW-GOALS o

Preparation of revised technical l

specifications to clarify charcoal and HEPA filter testing.

1 o

Review of design bases a

Design verification a

Preparation bf a comprehensive system description a

Recommendations for system improvements SCOPE / SCHEDULE o

7 Group members a

2000 manhours estimated a

Complete by December 31, 1988

w 8

e a

w W es PLANT MODIFICATION PROCESS l

l l

PLANT MODIFICATION PROCESS REASONS FOR INITIATING PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT o

Problems with design change process identified by APSL management a

Task force established to develop definitive, prioritized list of problems, alternatives and. recommendations METHODOLOGY l

0 Plant Modification Manual draft issued providing the general process overview a

Nuclear Operations reorganization created on-site Plant Modifications Department a

Plant Modification Process Implementation Plan approved a

Plant Modification Manual approved a

Development of Implementing Procedures I

l

)

PLANT MODIFICATION PROCESS MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS MORE ADVANCED PLANNING AND COORDINATION O

Prior to design phase (Project Plan) l 0

During design phase (In-process reviews) o Prior to installation (Installation Plan)

ML20237E408

Text

Enclosure:

Navigation menu

Search