ML20154A247
| ML20154A247 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 08/26/1988 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20153D679 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-373-88-01, 50-373-88-1, 50-374-88-01, 50-374-88-1, NUDOCS 8809120122 | |
| Download: ML20154A247 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000373/1988001
Text
.
.
.
Enclosure 2
'
ERRATA SHEET
PAGE
LINE
NOW READS
SHOULD READ
20
26
.. 18 months
.. 16 months
Basis - The length of the assessment period given in the report is
incorrect.
1
8809120122 080826
ADOCK 05000373
O
PD3
1
)
.._
_
__
.
. _ - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
_.- - . _ _ _ _ _ _
__.
-
Enclosure 3
.
.
!.
Quality Pronrams and Administrative Controls Affectina Quality
'
,
1.
Analysis
,
..
Evaluation of this area addresses two related, but separate,
functions.
,
l
First, it includes the assessment of licensee management's
!
activities to achieve quality in overall plant activities,
I
This assessment reflects the quality of licensee activities in
the individual functional areas that have been addrh;.ed in
,
rj'
other sections of this report,
,
Secondly, it includes the assessment of the licensee's internal,
independent quality oversight activities, such as those
performed by the quality control / quality assurance organizations,
j
'
i
Evaluation of the independent quality oversight activities
(
consisted of three inspections by regional inspectors and
i
l
continual observation by the resident inspectors. The areas
j
examined during two inspections included followup of seven
,
i
findings in the area of procurement and audits previously
!
i
identified in 1984 and 1987.
Quality assurance (QA) auditor
l
l
qualifications were also reviewed.
During the followup
i
!
inspection, the seven previously identified inspection findings
were closed with no safety issues or violations identified.
!
!
.
t
l
Overall management involvement in ensuring quality has been
I
good, and management has been aggressive in solving problems.
i
This was evident by the significant reduction in the nus.ber
,
1
of reportable events (19 for the current assessment period of
,
16 months compared to 26 for the previous assessment period
i
1
of 13.5 months) and violations (21 for the current assessment
i
period as compared to 34 for the previous assessment period)
[
,
l
resulting from personnel error.
These 1siprovements were the
,
l
result of site management aggressively identifying problems
i
I
and pursuing resolutions that involved the plant workers so
'
l
that they became part of the solutions.
An example of this is
I
clearly demonstrated by the elimination of the problem with
redundant verifications, which was a concern in the latter part
of the last assessment period.
The establishment of a site
j
team made up of personnel from the different departments
(operations, mechanical maintenance, instrument and control,
<
and technical staff) has helped prevent the problem from
'
'
l
recurring.
Management involvement in improving plant
performance also can be recognized in the plant painting
f
program to improve housekeeping and plant appearance.
l
I
I
Management involvement was evident in the procurement area as
- '
indicated by improved procedures for the control of procurement.
Also, management involvement was evident in the audit area as
l
indicated by the timely revision of the audit schedule to ensure
i
20
i
L.
.
.
.
. -
.
.
_
D
, . _ .
_
__
__
, m. ,
.
'"
D
/N
ERROR.
Enclosure 3
AGE
.
.
,
l
I.
Quality Programs and Administrative Controls Affecting Quality
>
,
1.
Analysis
.
Evaluation of this area addresses two related, but s
arate
functions.
First, it includes the assessment of licensee a
gemen s
i
activities to achieve quality in overo11 plant
i
s.
This assessment reflects the quality of lict
pee
ities in
,
the individual functional areas that have b
r sed in
other sections of this report.
'
Secondly, it includes the assess
nt of
nsee's internal,
independent quality oversight
ivitie
su
as those
performed by the quality cont 1/
rance organizations.
Evaluation of the independent
ity
sight activities
consisted of three inspections by re
1 inspectors and
continual observation by the resi
nspectors.
The areas
examined during two inspections inc ded followup of seven
findings in the area of p cureme
and audits previously
identified in 1984 and 19
u
ty assurance (QA) auditor
qualifications were als r
e-
During the followup
.
inspection, the seven
i
y identified inspuction findings
were closed with no s e
ues or violations identified.
6
Overall mar.agement i
ent in ensuring quality has been
good, and manag
een aggressive in solving problems.
This was eviden
significant reduction in the number
!
of reportab
ve t
9 for the current assessment period of
18 mon sc
26 for the previous assessment period
'
of 13
mont
violations (21 for the current assessment
perio a co a
to 34 for the previous assessment period)
result
f
ersonnel error.
The:S improvements were the
result
i
management aggressively identifying problems
j
and purs
resolutions that involved the plant workers so
'
t at they ecame part of the solutions.
An example of this is
early
monstrated by the elimination of the problem with
d t verifications, which was a concern in the latter part
t
last assessment period.
The establishment of a site
te
made up of personnel from the different departments
rations, mechanical maintenance, instrument and control,
j
d technical staff) has helped prevent the problem from
i
ecurring.
Management involvement in improving plant
performance also can be recognized in the plant painting
t
program to improve housekeeping and plant appearance.
l
Management involvement was evident in the procurement area as
indicated by improved procedures for the control of procurement.
Also, management involvement was evident in the audit area as
!
indicated by the timely revision of the audit schedule to ensure
<
20
.__. __.
-__ .
._ - .
-- .
.- -__-_,- - -______- - - -
__
-
.
. .. . ..
. . .
.
.
.
.
. . .
.
.
.
Enclosure 4
'
'
CommonD' % Edison
'
One Fast Na:o
8ta n C hca po.Is. e
.
MW W to Post Dmco Boa 767
CNcago, Ilhos (Npo . 0767
August 19, 1988
Mr. A. Bert Davis
Regional A binistrator
U.S. Nuclear degulatory Comission
Region III
799 Roosevelt Road
Glen Ellyn, IL 60137
Subject
LaSalle County Station Units 1 and 2
Response to the SALP 7 Board Report
MRC Decket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374__
Reference (a):
A.B. Davis letter to Cordell Reed dated
June 1, 1986.
1
Dear Mr. Davis
Reference (a) transmitted the SALP 7 Board Report for LaSalle County
)
Station and sumarised our performance ratings for the period November 16, 1986
'
thrcagh March 15, 1988. The purpose of this letter is to provide Coevnonwealth
Rolson's coments.
We believe that that SALP 7 Board Report is well written and generally
represents a balanced look at our strengths, improvements and problems encoun-
tered during the report period. We recognise this as the NRC's subjective
report card" which provides your perspective of the overall operation of
LaSalle.
As was discussed during the SALP Meeting on June 21, 1988. we were
especially disappointed with receiving a rating of Category 2 in Plant
operations because of the improvements we have completed in this area and the
good coments which have been received f rom INPO and other organisations.
i
Your recognisetion that performance at Comonwealth Edison Company plants has
,
iwproved and that the improvement at LaSalle has been dramatic is appreciated.
During the Sweary Remarks at the SALP meetlng it was indicated that,
j
although the nurnerical ratings of SALP 7 were not substantially dif ferent f rorn
those in SALP 6, in balance, the station was much improved.
Specifically, the
i
'
following were noted
The License area improved from a Category 2 to Category 1 rating
-
in SALP 7.
.enAoe# L r ,
-r _
m ovo 36 VW n
2.ff .
. - - -AUGt41m.
--
.
_. __
.
_
- -
_ _ _
_ .
--
---
.
Enclosure 4
.
,
A.B. Davis
-2-
August 19, 1988
.
Operations showed significant improvement, particularly in areas of
-
management involvement and response to MRC initiatives even though it
,
received a Category 2 rating.
!
)
Emergency Preparedness was rated a Category 2 and improving, versus
-
a Category 2 at the end of SALP 6.
,
Quality Programs and A&ministrat!ve Controls affecting quality showed
-
improvement in areas of management involvement and response to NRC
Initiatives even though it was rated Category 2.
The Maintenance Category 2 is "low" and increased attention need to
-
be given to the balance-of-plant area.
During your closing remarks at the meeting, you stated that "this is
not a bad SALP, but LaSelle did not stay up with the improvements pecurring in
the rest cf . the ladustry." As was discussed at the meeting, Commonwealth
Edison is committed to pursuing excellente and will concentrate more effort at
LaSalle in the form of a speelfic LaSalle SALP Improvement Plin.
In that
plan, which will be presented to your staf f when complete, we will
aggressively work to improve SALP awareneas in station attitudes and also to
improve regulatory perception.
We believe that the improvement noted in your report and in your
presentation at the SALP m&eting, as well as the performance improvements
results which we presented to you earlier in 1988, are the direct result of
our cannitment to achieve sustained oncellent performance at LaSalle Station.
This comnitment continues and will be even more focused with our LaSalle SALP
Improvement Plan.
Please direct any comments you may have regarding this response to
this office.
Very truly yours,
a
Cordell Reed
Senior Vice President
in
ces
P. Shemanski - Project Manager, NRR
R. D. Lanksbury - LaSalle Resident Inspector
5019K