U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532-4351

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT III-98-25 April 14, 1998

CONTACT: Jan Strasma 630/829-9663

Angela Greenman 630/829-9662

E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

NRC STAFF NOTES "STEADY IMPROVEMENT" IN PERFORMANCE

AT PERRY NUCLEAR PLANT IN LATEST ASSESSMENT

In its latest review of the Perry Nuclear Power Station, the

Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff notes that overall performance

there has improved, with ratings of "good" in three areas and

"superior" in a fourth. The plant near Perry, Ohio, is operated by

Centerior Service Company.

The report, called the Systematic Assessment of Licensee

Performance (SALP), rates the facility as "good" in plant operations,

maintenance, and engineering, and "superior" in plant support.

The NRC staff will discuss the review with Centerior Service Co.

officials in a meeting at 10 a.m. on April 21 in the Perry High School

auditorium, Perry, Ohio. The meeting is open to public observation.

NRC officials will be available at the conclusion of the meeting for

questions and comments from members of the public and the news media.

NRC SALP reports evaluate utilities in four functional areas --

plant operations, maintenance, engineering, and plant support -- and

assign ratings of Category 1,2, or 3 depending on whether their

performance in those areas is superior, good or acceptable. The report

on Perry gives the plant a "Category 2" rating -- indicating good

performance -- in operations, maintenance, and engineering, and a

"Category 1" rating -- indicating superior performance -- in plant

support.

The report covers the period September 15, 1996, through February

28 of this year.

The previous SALP report rated the Perry facility as Category 2 –

"good" – in all four assessment areas: Plant operations, maintenance,

and engineering, and plant support.

In notifying the utility of the SALP findings, NRC Regional

Administrator A. Bill Beach said, "Overall, I view that your

performance has improved during this assessment period. The actions

you have taken to identify and resolve performance weaknesses have

contributed to the steady improvement at Perry. I encourage you to

continue with these efforts so that further improvement is realized."
He noted that communications between reactor operators had

improved and that planned activities, like the reactor shutdown for

refueling and subsequent startup, were conducted very well. He added,

however, that the "communications of management expectations was not

always clear."

In the maintenance area, Beach said, "Plant material condition was

significantly improved and corrective and preventive maintenance item

backlogs were reduced." He noted, though, that occasional human

performance errors had occurred during maintenance activities.

"Performance in the area of engineering improved during the

period, especially in the quality of design change packages," Beach

continued. Problems, however, were found with maintaining the plant's

design documents and with older design calculations.

In the area of plant support, he pointed out that radiation

protection performance was "very good," security performance was

"effective," and emergency preparedness performance was "strong."

#####