ML20246C840

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Results of Panel 820602 & 04 Review of Status of Insp Program at Util & Readiness for Licensing.Panel Believes Recommendation for Licensing Can Be Made Based on Review
ML20246C840
Person / Time
Site: 05000000, Grand Gulf
Issue date: 06/10/1982
From: Robert Lewis
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To: James O'Reilly
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML20246C819 List:
References
FOIA-89-226 NUDOCS 8908250150
Download: ML20246C840 (4)
v • d • e


Text

..

= - -

+

l@ T,..

g t

N. J 01h?

SSI!.5 %-416 MEM. WiDUM FOR:. James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator F LG -

R. C. Lewis, Director. DH P srb.'::T:

P.EADI! ESS TDr. LIO::.5.'" Or GR:.tr 0;,r 1 In-accordance with,ROI 0162 dated June 1, 1982, a panel composed of

. representatives of the three d.ivisions and EI staff inet on June 2 and 4

-1982 to' review the status of the inspection prograc. at Grand Gulf 1 and the 4

readiness for licensing.

The results of this review are as follows:

Module Completion-The status of module completion is generally goed.

Module 2512 items have been completed.

Items remain outstanding on MC 2513 and 2514 modules, in particular the review of startup procedures.

The current module completion stacus is enclosed.-

4 St. :-

The panel reviewed two SALP periods 9/79 to 8/80 and 8/80 to 7/81.

In both

. periods the licensee's performance was_ rated as Category 2. compared to other facilities in Region 11 under construction.

Surveillance and preoperational testing areas were identified as needing additional attention. (Category'3).

A confirmation of action letter was issued on this subject in December 1981.

This was followed by an enforcement conference in February 1982. A hold had been placed by the licensee on testing prior to the conference.

Agreement was reached on a course of action regarding this problem.

Subsequently, the licensee's QA staff became noticeably involved in entrol of testing activities and substantial' improvement was observed.

1 Enfcrces,ent History Twc enforcement actions were taken - one, a confirmation of action letter in December 1981 and an enforcement conference in February (1982.

These actions i

resulted in major improvements in two areas of concern see SALP section above).

A review of enforcement act,1vity during the period 6/81 to 6/82 revealed no serious violations. There were about 20 violations of Severity IV or less.

1 The panel found the enforcement history to be acceptable considering the large l

number of inspections performed and the total inspections mandays represented.

f N,

B908250150 890816 l

PDR JOlA _ - _

N

C r

g It? _

tcli: cf the Region !! technical stafi en canductec tr. :Orcr ano A:,ril 19;.2.

l E- ~F.:cmorandun dated 3!3/SP ene t..'; nIfl dated 4/22!.'.c.)

Only rinor

t..
t as were raised.

These were in rt pcnse to the EW ;til ard wtre r t.... e :..

De ci cf ti:ensee Letter cf Cc--leti -

ir.. 2:,licant's position on unre:.ohit its9: {s iten*.i':ec ca. tMir m6,ter pur.cr list.

Region 11 has determined tr.3.

recer.t test results reviewed by tne applicant revealed a number of de.ficiencies that were nbt yet reflected on tr4 punch list.

A listing of temporary technical specification exempti' ns o

datec 2/12/82 was reviewed and Region II has no,particular concern regarding these.

A comprehensive listing and justification of technical specification exemptions promised to NRR by 5/28/82 has not been received for review by Region II.

s Review of Results of Independent QA Review Regior. II has not received the contractor's final report. We note that this iter. is addressed in the proposed liccr,se as a condition cf going t: car.f E:..

Oats:ancing items I.

One issue is the absence of adequate qualifications of the assistant Plant Manager who replaced an individual previously determined to be fully qualified per the FSAR.

The applicant has submitted an alterna-tive staffing plan to NRR.

Region II is negotiating with NRR and the applicant to strengthen the alternative offered by the applicant.

NRR

,has agreed to one of four stipulations recommended by Region II as conditions of licensing.

NRR requested that Region II pursue formal comitments from the applicant for the remaining three items and indicated support of the Region on the issues.

Final resolution of this natter is lending.

In review of continuing problems with adherence to procedures, we believe the Corporate Safety Review Committee-(SRC) should be directly I

involved with resolutions.

We believe the SRC should conduct or cause I

to be conducted the necessary audits to correct these problems.

Region II should schedule a special review of the effectiveness of the f

licensee's organization and plant operations prior to exceeding about l

50% power.

Region II believes the consultant advisor to the licensee should be on-site full time as.an advisor to the Plant Manager at least up to 251' Dov:er.

s I

,l Q*. : e.. '

.W

-( q, _ ; teco:.d issue in the lice d'. . ?..' list.

.i.. in.

.sti. as it:se 'etntified during liccnte: i t. ' ts of ; reop t c e t i n. i et.:,l ts, mu*.t te saied. The puncti list is vclu in:as-ar.d v.ill re.luire considerable timc-for review by Region II. Many items appearing on the list are being. tracked already by the Region. A determination of the significance of tree remaining ite:::s will be completed this week. 3. A third issue is, a number of precructional test results still to be reviewed by Region II. There were eleven sets of procedure results still to be reviewed, si>, of ci:t a r. r e f ety. rc la ted, kegion 11-inspectors arc standing by to accomodatt this revit.: hiien results are released. 4 A fourth issue is the concern raised by Humphrey on the design of the Mark III Containment. Region II is staying abreast of this issue with NRR having the technical lead. The panel believes a recommendation for licensing can be made based upon this review. The items discussed above are either included in the current 94300 memorandum. the proposed license, or are being pursued directly by Region ~II with the applicant. R. C. Lewis

Enclosure:

Module Status

h. ; ; *Wl' RII:PRF RII:P'O RII:ETP RII:EPOS RII:EI P.!!::P l

' Fi?.a; FCantrell ret:6er AHerdt PStor.r CAlderson E_p_ f}{_ __ __ _ 6/ /E2 0/. E2 f/ /fC el B29 U M ^

.yy-m,-m-._- 7 4 _e je s s. - ? 't,. ,g_ w E a = .. r e...-

i..

o c r r: a :u. e ,3,,, (, c.., 6 F

  • I f f.d 9
  • d )

1 4 1 1 '1 e b 9 9 e O e w me ~ _ _.. _ _. _. _ _ _ _ _, _ _, _ _,, _ _ _, _ _ _ _,,, _ _ _,, _, _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _, _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20246C840&oldid=3906239"