ML20206B838

Forwards Plan for Reviewing Util self-assessment Rept Onsite During Wk of 880620.Planning Meeting Schedule for 880620

ML20206B838
Person / Time
Site:	Pilgrim
Issue date:	06/16/1988
From:	Doerflein L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:	Frank Akstulewicz, Meyer G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20206B722	List: ML20206B717 ML20206B727 ML20206B741 ML20206B760 ML20206B770 ML20206B780 ML20206B784 ML20206B792 ML20206B810 ML20206B825 ML20206B838 ML20206B847 ML20206B859 ML20206B915 ML20206B960 ML20206B970 ML20206C001 ML20206C010 ML20206C025 ML20206C041
References
FOIA-88-198 NUDOCS 8811160032
Download: ML20206B838 (4)

Text

a. ., v. . > . , ,

o .

June 16, 1988 To: l' rank Akstulewicz Glenn Meyer Attached is the plan for reviewing the BEco self-assessment report on-site during the week of June >

20, 1988.

For planning purposes I intend to have a team meeting i to discuss our oblect[ves and answer your questions regarding the revl,ew at 1:00 p.m., June 20. BECO will .

give a brief presentation on the self-assessment process at 2:00 p.m.

Rooms have been reserved at the Sheraton for 4 nights beginifeg Jane 20. r 4 .

\

l gw \.) @ t, A h -

eci /

S. Collins R. Blough J. Wiggins l

l i

l i

i i

i

(

6 i

kdIIfjfp? 001005 JOHNSong Q ue** *g_g9g g

l l

I i

SELF-ASSESSMENT REVIEW PLAN The purpose of this attachment is to provide some guidance to the reviewers of the BECo Self-Assessment Report to ensure a timely and uniform review. The Self-Assessment of Readiness for Restart Report is not a stand alone document.

The report provides a summary description, usually only one or two sentences, of issues related to plant and equipment performance , operational performance, and management and organization which require specific action before restart as well as those actions that have or will be taken in response to the major SALP 86-99 observations. The discussions focus only upon the relatively discrete set of issues BEco management considers most important and worthy of greatest attention at this time. In most cases, in particular with the responses to the SALP observations, BEco's findings and/or identified issues appear only reactionary to previous NRC findings. There are other cases where it is not clear what the conclusion means or it's significance.

Therefore, in order to perform an adequate review of the BEco self-assessment it is necessary to understand the inputs / data used and the screening process / methodology used to reach the conclusions stated in the self-assesement. '*

on-site review has been scheduled to have access to this data and the licensee personnel involved in the self-assessment process. Details of the NRC review are provided below:

I. Scope of the on-site review The following steps are to be included as part of the review:

a. Review and understand the contents of the data base (files);

b. Understand the methodolcgy/ process used to screen the data and reach the conclusions noted in the self-assessment report (combined with step e. will cause an independent judgement on the licensee's determination of which are restart issues vs longer term issues);

c. Understand the meaning and significance of the conclusions reached;

d. insure the data / bases support the conclusions;

e. Identify issues noted by the licensee which appear significant but are not addressed in the self-assessment report;

f. Review status of program development and implementation for those issues required for restart;

, s 9 Ensure new prograts are addressing root causes;

h. *

.dentify changes to the Restart Plan based on i self-assessment findings;

1. Identify any issues requiring an RAI.

II. Additional items for review i The NRC review should ensure that, in each functional ,

area, BEco addressed the following past generic  :

t- weaknesses: .

I

a. Adequacy of staffing and control of overtime; Maintenance backlog;  !

b.

I c. Procedural / drawing adequacy and personnel  !

adherence to procedures;

d. Management involvement and effectivness (including ,

planning and coordination between various i departments, control of contractors, and I timeliness and effectiveness of corrsctive  ;

actions);

e. QA/QC oversight including effectiveness of program i for self identification of weaknesses;  ;

P

f. Evalaation of the effectiveness of the improvement programs (e.g. RAP, MCIAP) ; and .

g. Adequacy J' training.

The self-assessment report must also resolve the l following specific issuest I

a. Status of once per cycle surveillance tests;

b. Status of the surveillance tracking system;

c. DC Breaker testing and preventive maintenance;

d. 4160 Bus UV protection setpoints;

e. Control of maintenance and post work test l programs; and

f. High rate of unplanned ESF as*,uations.

-l t

I I

i y

i III. Review Area Assignments (tentative)

Although many of the sections will overlap, I propose the following section/ area review assignments. These are subject to change based on interest and/or it becomes clear the work load is uneven.

Doerflein Sections II.A.2, II.B.1, and II.B.4 Meyer Sections II.A.1, II.B.3, and II.B.8 Akstulewicz Sections II.A.3, II.B.9, II.B.10 and .

II.B.11 All Sectione IV and V IV. Report Format The report is expected to be in the form of an SER with a cover meno for distribution. The following areas are L.5e minimum the report will includet

a. Background

b. Review Scope

c. Findings

-Thoroughness of data / inputs

-Methodology

-Significance of conclusions

-Adequacy of required improvement programs

d. Conclusions and Recommendations

-Meets CAL requirements ????

-Bases supports conclusions ????

-Methodol m adequate ????

-Programs inplace/ scheduled to allow IATI ???

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _