ML20137B163

Forwards Task Force Review of Operational History for LaSalle County Stations,Units 1 & 2, Final Rept.Results Indicate Plant Regulations History Poor & Problems Evident in Mod Program Mgt

ML20137B163
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	11/22/1985
From:	James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:	Reed C COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
Shared Package
ML20137B166	List: ML20137B163 ML20137B195
References
NUDOCS 8511260201
Download: ML20137B163 (3)

Text

- ,

s umsso ss:.sas Dcc.5/A'S8 Nem\ n NUCLEA3 REGULATORY COMMisslON neosom m - ~

j g c;}

E

! 7ee noostvsLT noAo otsN eLLYN. lLLlNOIS selH hg Qj

..... l l

November 22, 1985 Docket No. 50-373 Docket No. 50-374 Commonwealth Edison Company ATTN: Mr. Cordell Reed Vice President Post Office Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Gentlemen:

Over the past several months, Comonwealth Edison Company's LaSal)e County Nuclear Station has experienced numerous events which have degradeo safety systems. These events have occurred despite the efforts of Commonwealth Edison Company to improve the regulatory performance of its LaSalle County Nuclear Station.

To aid in our evaluation of the underlying problems, I formed a special task-force to perform an in-depth review of the operating history of LaSalle County Station. The task force determined that: (1) plant regulatory perfonnance has historically been poor -- since 1982 there have been thirteen enforcement conferences, numerous management meetings, and the imposition of five civil penalties; (2) certain plant systems experienced problems including equipment failures and/or isolations on a regular basis; (3)' problems are evidt:nt in the management of the modification program; (4) control of work activities affecting the plant is inadequate; (5)plantonratorsroutinelydealwith excessive numbers of work requests, procedure c1anges, limiting conditions for operation time clocks and Technical Specification abnormal conditions; and (6) many of these same problem areas were previously ide.itified by Commonwealth Edison Company in an onsite review conducted on July 16, 1982. These findings are set forth in the enclosed NRC Task Force Review of Operational History for LaSalle County Station Units 1 and 2, dated September 24, 1985.

As a result of the task force review, the NRC has concluded that (1) equipment problems are not being aggressively resolved; (2) planning anel control of site activitiesarenoteffective;(3)manyareasofconcernhavebeenidentified for which immediate corrective action is necessary; (4) the frequency of

)ersonnel errors remains excessive; and (5) the Coninonwealth Edison Regulatory

>arfonnance Improvement Plan instituted 4n February 1983 has not resulted in sufficient improved performance at LaSalle County Station.

A P

l

Commonwealth Edison Company November 22, 1985 These evaluations and conclusions demonstrate significant deficiencies in the current management, management structures, and programmatic systems that are in place to control site activities. If left uncorrected and current trends continue, significant safety problems may develop at the LaSalle County Station. Accordingly, to enable us to determine whether or not the LaSalle County Station licenses should be modified, suspended, or revoked, you are requested, pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(f), to evaluate and address the following concerns:

(1) Adequacy of management, management structures and practices that have contributed to the performance of LaSalle County Station and changes that you have determined are needed to improve this performance.

(2) Adequacy of the maintenance and modification programs, including criteria for prioritizing modifications and work requests, and changes that you have determined are needed to improve these programs.

(3) Adequacy of control of work activities in the plant to minimize their impact on operations and changes that you have determined are needed to improve the control of these work activities.

(4) Adequacy of the implementation of the Regulatory Improvement Plan and any other ongoing corrective actions and changes that you have detennined are needed to improve this Plan and these corrective actions.

(5) Adequacy of the resources comitted to the LaSalle County Station and plans you have made to change this resource commitment.

Your response should address actions taken and your plans to improve performance in each of the general areas described above and any other areas you deem appropriate. Your plans should include specific milestones, specific time limits, and measurement criteria for each milestone to accomplish such improvement. Additionally, yot response should address the resources that will be comitted to accomplish these tasks, and sustain the anticipated improved perfonnance.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f), you are requested to furnish, under oath or af firmation, no later than 30 days from the date of this letter, your plans and programs to resolve the concerns identified above. Your plans and programs shall specify actions that will have been completed and goals that will have been accomplished prior to restart of LaSalle Unit I from its fall outage. Also, include a schedule for any longer term actions. Specifically, address the number of outstanding work requests, modifications, and procedure

Commonwealth Edison Company November 22, 1985 changes that will remain open and your justification of Oy Unit 1 should be restarted if these items are not current. We are prepared to meet with you in our Region III office in Glen Ellyn Illinois, to discuss your plans and programs prior to the submittal of your written response and as soon as your program is sufficiently well-defined to make such a meeting useful.

Sincerely, yJamesG.Keppler% W&

Regional Administrator l

Enclosure:

Task Force Review of Operational History for LaSalle County Station, j Units 1 and 2, dated September 24, 1985 cc w/ enclosure:

i D. L. Farrar Director

! of Nuclear Licensing l G. J. Diederich, Plant l Manager l DCS/RSB (RIDS) i Licensing Fee Management Branch Resident Inspector, RIII l Phylliss Dunton, Attorney General's Office, Environmental Control Division i

i l

l 1

I i

l h

_ - - - - - -