IR 05000206/1992030
| ML13329A195 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 11/04/1992 |
| From: | Wong H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13329A194 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-206-92-30-MM, 50-361-92-30, 50-362-92-30, NUDOCS 9212040366 | |
| Download: ML13329A195 (40) | |
Text
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report No /92-30, 50-361/92-30, and 50-362/92-30 Docket No, 50-361, 50-362 License No DPR-13, NPF-10, NPF-15 Licensee:
Southern California Edison Company Irvine Operations Center 23 Parker Street Irvine, California 92718 Facility Name:
San Onofre Units 1, 2, and 3 Meeting at:
San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, San Clemente, California Report Prepared By: D. L. Solorio, Resident Inspector Approved By:
________
H. ong, C ef Date Signed Reactor ProjectsSection II Summary A management meeting was held on October 9, 1992, to discuss the status of Unit 1 permanent shutdown planning and recent plant issues. These topics included:
-
SCE Business Plan (Nuclear Organization)
-
Status of Engineering Issues and Initiatives
-
Engineering, Maintenance, and Operations Interface Problems
-
Maintenance Issues
-
Status of Individual Plant Examination A copy of the slides used during the licensee's presentation is enclose PDR ADOCK 05000206 G
DETAILS 1. Meeting Attendees Southern California Edison Company H. Ray, Senior Vice President, Nuclear H. Morgan, Vice President and Site Manager R. Krieger, Station Manager J. Reilly, Manager, Nuclear Engineering & Construction B. Katz, Manager, Nuclear Oversight R. Rosenblum, Manager, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs W. Marsh, Assistant Manager, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs K. Slagle, Deputy Station Manager R. Waldo, Operations Manager L. Cash, Maintenance Manager D. Breig, Manager, Station Technical M. Short, Manager, Site Technical Services G. Hammond, Supervisor, Onsite Nuclear Licensing D. Axline, Engineer, Onsite Nuclear Licensing D. Ortiz, Unit 1 Outage Manager D. McFarlane, Manager, Budgets and Administration D. Barron, Corporate Communication Representative S. Folsom, Corporate Communication R. Lee, Supervisor, Nuclear Safety Group A. Thiel, Manager, Electrical Systems Engineering Nuclear Requlatory Commission B. Faulkenberry, Deputy Regional Administrator, Region V K. Perkins, Director, Division of Reactor Safety and Projects, Region V M. Fields, NRR Project Manager, Units 2 & 3 H. Wong, Chief, Section 2, DRS&P, Region V G. Cook, Senior Public Affairs Officer, Region V C. Caldwell, Senior Resident Inspector D. Solorio, Resident Inspector D. O'Neal, Engineer, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation J. Moulton, Engineer, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Others P. Diehl, Reporter, Oceanside Blade-Citizen 2. Details The meeting convened at 8:30 a.m.. Mr. Faulkenberry opened the meeting by stating that this was intended to be one of a continuing series of meetings with SCE management to discuss issues of mutual interest. M Ray introduced the SCE presentatio *
__I2 a. Unit 1 Shutdown Planning Mr. Slagle initiated SCE's presentation of the Unit 1 shutdown planning schedule. Major milestones were presented including the anticipated Unit 1 coastdown beginning November 16, 1992 and a shutdown date of November 30, 199 The shipment of Unit 1 spent fuel would begin approximately January 11, 1993, and should be completed by February 12, 1993. M Faulkenberry asked which Unit 1 fuel assemblies would be moved to facilitate off loading the core after the Unit is shutdown. M Breig indicated that criteria exist to move intact fuel with the appropriate decay heat history and that approximately 49 assemblies would be moved to the Unit 3 spent fuel poo The assemblies would be transferred in a cask that holds seven assemblies, therefore seven shipments would be required to complete the fuel movemen Mr. Ray added that although only 49 assemblies were initially planned to be moved, SCE would not rule out future needs to move more assemblies should the need arise. When questioned about the effects that the increase in the number of fuel assemblies going into the Unit 3 fuel pool would have on future storage capacity in that Unit, Mr. Breig indicated that there would be little effect on Unit 3 storage capacity and full core offload would be achievable until the year 2002. The Unit 1 core would be completely offloaded by March 10, 199 Mr. Slagle then discussed key licensing actions associated with the Unit shutdown. Responses to NRC questions indicated the following:
-
The EP plan would change to include the credible accidents for the Unit in a shutdown configuration and would probably eliminate the need for drill A series of exemption requests would be submitted to the NRC to devitalize certain areas of Unit 1, as related to the site security pla SCE would submit a request for the Unit I certified fuel handler program and expected a response from the NRC in the first quarter of 199 A few modifications would be made to more permanently tie in the spare spent fuel pool pump. Mr. Morgan indicated that there also may be piping modifications necessary should SCE decide to use the auxiliary feedwater tank for a water source after the shutdow A preliminary decommissioning plan is to be submitted by SCE approximately November 1, 1992, and permanent defueled Technical Specifications by approximately December 1, 199 *II3 Mr. Faulkenberry questioned how SCE was going to phase out other systems after shutdown. Mr. Slagle replied that they plan to drain and de-energize unnecessary systems, and that there was no intention to put systems in "wet lay up."
Any equipment salvage would be dependent on the age of components. Mr. Faulkenberry asked if these activities would be initiated before SCE submitted their decommissioning plan. Mr. Ray responded that he was not aware that there were any restrictions against such activities once SCE possessed a "Possession Only License."
Mr. Ray reiterated that the plant will be removed from service with no intentions of returning it to service. Mr. Perkins noted that the approval of defueled Technical Specifications might have an effect on what could be salvaged. Mr. Rosenblum stated that SCE has put together a transition team to develop a detailed plan for the shutdown of the Uni Mr. Perkins requested that SCE discuss the schedule for staffing of the Unit. Mr. Waldo responded that for 1993, Operations staffing would average about 45 operators (staffing for the beginning of the year would be higher to accommodate activities associated with core offload).
Staffing for 1994 would consist nominally of 16 operators. Mr. Waldo indicated that Senior Reactor Operators would be grandfathered, and certified as Fuel Handlers. Mr. Faulkenberry questioned how SCE planned to keep morale high over the remaining months of operation. Mr. Waldo indicated that generally, operators were doing well and did not feel an urgency for moving to other positions. Mr. Morgan stated that SCE has repeatedly stressed to operators that there will be no layoffs. SCE indicated that reductions in contractor support had already occurred and would continue. Mr. Ray indicated that he was satisfied that the staffing morale issues had been addressed, and that SCE has put forward adequate attention and will continue to do s When asked, Mr. Slagle stated that they expected to get into the final shutdown configuration after core offload, scheduled for March 1993. SCE would start the transition after core offload and complete the project at the end of 199 Mr. Faulkenberry questioned if SCE had prior experience with spent fuel movement between the three units. Mr. Morgan responded that they had moved fuel from Unit I to Units 2 and 3 previously. SCE planned to use the same technology, as described in a submittal to the NRC (previously approved by the NRC) for the upcoming activities associated with the Unit 1 shutdow With regard to the funding of the decommissioning of Unit 1, SCE stated that by the requirements of 10 CFR 50.75, $104 million would be needed and SCE's current estimate for the nuclear aspects of decommissioning is approximately $109 million. The total decommissioning of Unit 1 (including site restoration) is estimated
by SCE to be $211 million. SCE has collected to date approximately
$200 million into the decommissioning fund, with annual contributions of $24 millio b. Nuclear Organization Business Plan Mr. McFarlane described SCE's approach to developing their business plan. The plan, as it was developed, was strengthened to hold people more accountable. In response to Mr. Faulkenberry's question regarding the Business Plan, Mr. Ray stated that the Plan was not a new concept, but it has evolved and now encourages more team efficiency. The enclosure to this report contains SCE's slides addressing the Business Pla C. Engineering Organization. Programs, and Status of Recent Issues Mr. Riley presented SCE's progress on engineering initiatives as a continuation of discussions from the previous management meeting held in Region V. Mr. Perkins stated that during the last SALP period, SCE had continuing problems with ensuring a consistent level of performance in the area of engineering, and questioned how changes as presented would address this issu Mr. Riley stated that he felt that the roots of this issue were with engineering supervision and leadership not reinforcing the importance of consistency in performing activities. Additionally, Mr. Riley indicated that recent efforts directed at improving supervisory effectiveness would help achieve consistency of engineering activities. The NRC requested that SCE discuss how these efforts would help prevent further knowledge, testing, and interface weaknesses such as those that were associated with the issues discussed belo ) Unit 1 Hydraulic Valve HV-852B Mr. Short described the events that lead to the failure of the Unit 1 Main Feedwater Discharge/Safety Injection Isolation valve HV-852B and the lessons learned. The first failure of the engineering organization was their failure to recognize when the leak rate and the need for repeated charging of the accumulators were beyond previous experience. Once SCE recognized that there was a problem, SCE aggressively pursued corrective action Mr. Short stated that initially the engineering organization denied responsibility for allowing the valve to reach an inoperable condition, but he considered that response unacceptable. Additionally, discussions with the vendor were not helpfu Mr. Short indicated that in conjunction with M Riley, the engineering organizations were being encouraged to take on more ownership for their areas of expertis Mr. Faulkenberry asked if adequate senior management attention was devoted to the initial problems associated with HV-852 Mr. Short responded that there was not enough management involvement at the tim ) Operations and Engineering Divisions Interface Mr. Breig presented SCE's characterization of recent events that resulted from an inadequate interface between the Operations (OPS) and Station Technical (STEC) organization He stated that these problems were attributed to weaknesses in training and procedural interface controls between organizations rather than a strict personnel interface proble In particular, STEC procedural standards were not comparable to operations procedural standards. In addition, Mr. Breig stated that evaluations of this area were being conducted by the Nuclear Oversight organizatio Mr. Breig stated that STEC had initiated a review of their procedures (scheduled to be completed by the end of the year)
to ensure interface deficiencies are eliminated. Other efforts directed at resolving these problems were the creation of a qualification guide for system engineers, additional technical training, and on the job training. STEC has set a goal for system engineers to complete the qualification guides by the end of the first quarter in 199 To specifically address concerns that resulted from a salt water cooling (SWC) pump seal line valve misalignment, STEC planned to enhance procedures to require verification signatures after equipment has been manipulated. Mr. Wong stated that operations did have some of the responsibility to ensure the seal water supply valve was returned to servic Mr. Waldo responded that a Senior Reactor Operator (SRO) was required to evaluate the situation when procedures other than operations procedures were being used to manipulate plant equipment. In the case of the misaligned SWC valve, that had not been don Mr. Perkins noted the need for SCE personnel to have a critical questioning attitude and a healthy degree of skepticis e. Maintenance Improvements and Recent Issues Mr. Cash presented improvements in Maintenance organization programs (see attached slides).
Mr. Perkins asked if the maintenance order backlog had been reduced and what was the rate of addition to the backlog. Mr. Cash responded that the backlog had been reduced and that maintenance order input was constant to slightly increasin In the area of maintenance planning, Mr. Cash indicated that Maintenance was making significant improvements as evident by the
- decreasing numbers of maintenance orders rejected by the Quality Control (QC) organization. Additionally, revisions to maintenance orders had decreased 50 percent from a year ago. The current rejection rate for maintenance orders was approximately two percen High Pressure Safety Injection Pump Repairs The licensee's methodology for repairs to an inoperable high pressure safety injection (HPSI) pump was discussed. Mr. Cash stated that Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) was factored into their maintenance planning process. However, in the case of Unit 3 High Pressure Safety Injection (HPSI) pump P019, SCE had to weigh the benefit to safety of quickly completing the repairs (by round the clock repairs to the pump) with that of using the most skilled resources and doing a quality evaluation of the problem. M Rosenblum stated that they began the troubleshooting and repair efforts with their most skilled personnel working one shift. As they increased the knowledge base of additional personnel, SCE went to round the clock repair effort Mr. Perkins asked which HPSI pumps (three each for Units 2 and 3)
had been worked on using the old overhaul procedure and that required inspection to determine if bearings had been installed improperly as with Unit 3 HPSI pump P019. Mr. Morgan responded that Units 2 and 3 HPSI pumps, 2P018 and 3P018, required inspectio Mr. Perkins questioned the appropriateness of SCE's decision to work on HPSI pump 2P019 on a one shift per day basis in spite of the PRA information that indicated an approximate 10 percent increase in the potential for core damage by having this pump out of service for long periods of time. Mr. Cash responded that Mr. Morgan and M Krieger challenged his decision to initially begin working the pump only one shift daily. However, they considered that HPSI P019 was a third of a kind pump that was installed for operational flexibilit As such, they were within the requirements of Technical Specifications. In addition, they considered that the benefits outweighed the risks of working on the pump one shift and having the pump inoperable for such a long period of tim f. Individual Plant Evaluation (IPE) and PRA Overview Mr. Lee stated SCE's current schedule for submittal of their IPE was May 1993. The Level I PRA was 95 percent complete and the Level II PRA was 65 percent complete. Comparisons were drawn against other site IPEs with SONGS 2 and 3 having one of the lowest core damage frequencies for internal events per year. The total core damage frequency of SONGS 2 and 3 is 3.5 E-5. Mr. Lee closed his presentation by stating that the best result from their IPE was the absence of unanticipated event. Closing Remarks Mr. Faulkenberry closed the meeting by requesting that SCE keep Region V informed of the status of Unit I decommissioning scheduling. Mr. Morgan suggested a meeting with Region V management at the appropriate time to facilitate this reques Mr. Faulkenberry also stated that over the last several years, the NRC has been concerned with SCEs effectiveness in dealing with emergent problems and that based on this meeting he saw an attempt to address this proble The meeting adjourned at 11:10 UNIT 1 FINAL SHUTDOWN MAJOR MILESTONES Begin Coastdown 11/16/92 Open Breakers 11/30/92 Begin Transshipment 01/11/93 Complete Transshipment 02/12/93 Core Offloaded 03/10/93 Containment Closure 05/15/93 SFP Thermal Equilibrium of 15(0F 03/20/95 rN-LnKAJM
UNIT 1 FINAL SHUTDOWN KEY LICENSING ACTIONS Preliminary Decommissioning 11/01/92 Plan Submittal NRC Issue Possession Only License 11/01/92 Permanently Defueled Technical Specifications Submittal 12/01/92 Approval 06/01/93 Emergency Plan Submittal 12/01/92 POL Certification Letter 03/11/93 Proposed Decommissioning Plan 11/30/94
& Licensing Termination Application FNIlAKEYLC
UNIT I FINAL SHUTDOWN CONFIGURATION SERVICE WATER CCW RESERVOIR SURGE TA..K.
PMU PPS PRIMAR
<D CCW PUMPS MAKEUP CCW HXTN NOTE: THIS CONFloURA11ON W HX APPLES DURING CORE FIRE FIRE PPS OFFLOAD UNTIL DECAY REQIRED CCR WATER FPMVA IX-NDWPP INTAKEAUX FDWIR~
SFP PPS STORAGE CIRC WATER XTANK ISPENT FUEL POOL UX
--
-
UILDING YARD LEGEND ITES P
SFP COOUNG INTKETSFP MAKEUP SL RADWASTE PUMPS
SONGS 1 O&
COST PROFILE (YOE $ X MILLIONS @ 100% Level)
100
81 8 0 -
71
7470 60-
63 40-
63
53
59
74
0 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 F/C AUTHORIZED MINUS %
INCREM OUTAGE O&M
22
13
13
-
-
-
BASE O&M
49
56
69
70
48
0 BASE O&M [2 INCREM OUTAGE O&M OMCOS1 7.CH3
-PROPOSED BUDGET SONGS 2 & 3 O&M COST PROFILE (YOE $ X MILLIONS @ 100% Level)
250 216 200 193 191 162-174
/
,
,
177 150-4 139 144 143 150 100 108 111 123 124 130 157 168 175 172
0 YEAR 1984 1905 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 OUTAGE U2C3 U2C4/U3C3 U3C4 U2C5 U3C5 U2C6 U3C6 U2C7/U3C7 DURATION
100168 112
100
65 85185 INCREM OUTAGE O&M
31
20
17
41
BASE O&M 193 162 108 111 123 124 130 157 168 175 172 O BASE O&M 13INCREM OUTAGE O&M oMCOIS. CHS
e
- 1 DECOMMISSIONING FUNDING FOR SONGS 1 o
10 CFR 50.75 REQUIRES APPROXIMATELY $104 MILLION (1990$) FOR NUCLEAR DECOMMISSIONING OF SONGS 1 o
EDISON'S CURRENT DECOMMISSIONING STUDY ESTIMATES $109 MILLION (1990$) FOR SONGS 1 NUCLEAR DECOMMISSIONING, WHICH IS PART OF THE $211 MILLION (1990$) FOR SONGS 1 SITE RESTORATION o
EDISON AND SDG&E HAVE CURRENTLY COLLECTED $200 MILLION FOR SONGS 1 SITE RESTORATION o
EDISON AND SDG&E CONTINUE TO COLLECT-$24 MILLION PER YEAR o
CURRENT "SHUTDOWN O&M EXPENSE" IS BEING RECOVERED IN RATES o
DETAILED DECOMMISSIONING PLAN TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE NRC IN 1994
BUSINESS PLAN FORMAT
-
INTRODUCTORY SECTIONS
-
FORWARD
-
VISION AND VALUES
-
PRIORITIES
-
MISSION STATEMENT
-
BP INCLUDES ONLY SIGNIFICANT CHANGING OR CHALLENGING ACTIVITIES
-
GOALS ARE PRIORITIZED BASED ON THE FIVE NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION PRIORITIES
-
HIERARCHY OF GOALS, STRATEGIES AND ACTIONS:
- GOAL
- STRATEGIES WHICH SUPPORT THE GOAL
- ACTIONS WHICH ACCOMPLISH THE STRATEGY
-
ASSIGNMENT MATRIX
-
FINANCIAL INFORMATION AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
WHY HAVE A BUSINESS PLAN
-
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FACING THE NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION:
-
SHUTDOWN OF UNIT 1
-
COMPETITION WITH OTHER GENERATING SOURCES
-
INCREASED REGULATORY SCRUTINY
-
NEED A COMPREHENSIVE LONG RANGE PLAN TO ADDRESS THE CHANGES
-
NEED TO TIE THE NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION DIVISIONS TOGETHER AS A TEAM
-
NEED TO OPENLY COMMUNICATE OUR BUSINESS PLAN TO OUR EMPLOYEES
-
NEED TO EXTEND THE CORPORATE STRATEGIC PLAN INTO THE NUCLEAR ORGANIZATION
NUCLEAR PRIORITIES COMPLIANCE WITH SAFETY REQUIREMENTS RECOGNITION FOR COMPLIANCE ADHERENCE TO BUDGET LIMITATIONS OPTIMIZE ELECTRICAL PRODUCTION PUBLICLY RECOGNIZED EXCELLENCE
FUTURE STATUS AND UPDATES OF BP
-
ACTION ITEMS WILL BE STATUSED QUARTERLY, BEGINNING 1/1/93
-
BP WILL BE REVISED AND UPDATED ANNUALLY
-
STATUS AND UPDATES WILL BE COORDINATED BY B&A DIVISION
NRC/SCE Management Meeting October 9, 1992 Southern California Edison
Status of Engineering Issues and Initiatives 1. Integration of Site Engineering Organizations into the Engineering Improvement Program
- Focus on NEDO, Station Technical and Site Support Services 2. Status of Key Areas of Ongoing Development
- Improvements in Process and Methods
- Improvements in Personnel Performance
- Current Emergent Engineering Issues
Improvements in Process and Methods
- Quality Action Teams (QATs)
- Calculation Standar MOV Software
-
Setpoint Software
- In Process Monitoring
Improvements in Personnel Performance
- Benchmarking
- Supervisor Selection Process
- QAT on Supervisory Training
- Engineering Diagnostic Review
-
Atlas Consulting Group
-
Corporate Systemics Incorporated
HV-852B San Onofre Unit 1
- Timeline
- Assessment
- Actions
- 0*
Timeline
- Feb/Mar - minor leakage
- Mid-April - leakage increased
- Major effort to locate the leaks
- May - Operability assessment
- Vendor consultations
- Confirm other valves not affected
- Develop a method to verify piston location
Actions
- All other actuators with similar potential inspected
- On-line re-charge practices have been modified to include UT
- Focus on supervisory performance
- Recognition
- Knowledge required by systems engineers
- Timeliness of assessments
ENGINEERING OPERATIONS INTERFACE Events AFW IST Control Room Interface Salt Water Cooling Pump Sealwater Lineup Cause Training Procedural Control Engineering Operations Interface
TECHNIC IVISION Daniel P. relg Manager Station Technical 89263 Connie U. Shelton San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Secretary 86339 Mark A. Hlerschthat lejT~lSpevsrSprio Manager'
.
MngrPwrGnrto ehia upr Nuclear Systems Engineering 87t48 Sit o
89301 Dave A. Niebruegge Russell A. Neat David W. Tuttle Al red B. Meichler NSS ysem SpeviorElectrical Engineer Ing Balance of Plant Codes and Weldin
"'NSSS Systems Supervisor864
86103 89681 JimPaul P. Blakeslee PLylanc Mni NSSS Auxiliary Instrumentation 8 Heat Removal Neal J. Qulgley
.alsA aosn NSSS Mechanical C
ter eriP 86746 CoptrUgne.ng-u e~l
Mike J. McDevittC W
son Reactor Engineering rRoger V. MitchellT STA Supervisor Control Tec~nca Pr2 rm 86696 89201 David J. Ramendlck Percy D. Haralson Reactor Engineering Information Systems Otage Rerhnta 88704872
.Danny K. Powers AlnKrz8 3Dne
.Fe Station Tech. Advisors an Kurtz 89833 89155Cmue aneac tto ehia Pete H. Penseyres893 Integrated Plantved operations RCMSu
- AllenelJ. Thlel 870484 RD 0S
Where We Were Where We Want To Be Knowledge Skills Knowledge Skills Barriers Attitude/
Culture Attitude/
Culture Quality Work Habits
WORK PROCESS MAINTENANCE PLANNING HUMAN PERFORMANCE & SUPERVISORY EFFECTIVENESS
- WORK PROCESS ACTIONS
- WORK AUTHORIZATION TASK FORCE
- Moved'Process outside of Control Room
- Relocated Work Authorization Coordinator & Maintenance General Foreman
- Established Work Process Oversight Committee
- ON LINE SCHEDULING
- Long Range Schedule Developed with safety equipment outages scheduled once per cycle
- Established work window managers to coordinate planning and implementation of work
- PRA reviews of selected work schedules RESULTS
- IMPROVED OPERATIONS MAINTENANCE INTERFACE
- MAINTENANCE ORDER BACKLOG REDUCED
- INCREASE IN WORK COMPLETED AS SCHEDULED
- SAFETY SYSTEM AVAILABILITY HAS IMPROVED
- PLANNED MAINTENANCE CONTRIBUTION TO PLANT RISK REDUCED
SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION WORK CONTROL SYSTEM INDICATORS LAST 12 MONTHS 2400
-***
,
,2000 40 0.o............................
..............
.................................................
10/05 11/02 11/30 12/28 01/26 02/22 03121 04/17 05/10 00112 07/11 00107 09100 10/06 Backlog 1053 1724 1773 1779 1774 1719 1740 1006 1522 1407 1366 992 063 710 Dates 0..Backlog
MAINTENANCE PLANNING ACTIONS
- RELOCATION & REORGANIZATION OF UNITS 2/3 PLANNERS
- ISSUED PLANNERS GUIDE
- DEVELOPED PLANNER TRAINING PROGRAM RESULTS
- QC REJECTS OF MAINTENANCE ORDER PLANS REDUCED
- NUMBER OF MAINTENANCE ORDERS RETURNED TO PLANNING FOR REVISION REDUCED
- 0 *
PLANNING REJECTION RATE 1988 AND 1992
11
-10
9
8 w
7 --
z 6-6
5-
-5 w
2 4-
-4 3-
-3 2-
-2
1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
92-REJECTION RATE *12 MONTH AVERAGE-REJECTION RATE *12 MONTH AVERAGE
HUMAN PERFORMANCE & SUPERVISORY EFFECTIVENESS ACTIONS
- OBSERVATION TRAINING
- COACHING & COMMUNICATION OF EXPECTATIONS
- PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REVIEW
- MONITORING AND FEEDBACK
- ROOT CAUSE TRAINING & COACHING PROGRAM RESULTS
- REDUCTION IN MAINTENANCE RELATED EVENTS
- ATTRITION SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED
- NO OBSERVED PERFORMANCE CONCERNS DURING RECENT EVALUATION
- TURNOVERS & TAILBOARDS NOTED AS A STRENGTH
Station Maintenance EM1992 M5199-6 0
o 5 0
................
...
O
-
0 1 0...
...
P MJ ID IS CA PP
00 OP IM Item Code
liPS! 19 UNIT 3 -1992-R C>l
- 2 X%
' e-
~x xJ
.0 c
7
0
25 1 1I MAY IJUNE IJULY IAUG ISEPT OCT
..................
........................ :
.
..
IPE Status Level 1:
95% complete Level 2:
65% complete Submittal date: May 1, 1993
Comparison with Other IPEs PWR CDF for Internal Events /yr Surry (initial)
1E-3 Robinson 2 3.2E-4 Turkey Pt 3/4 9.9E-5 Surry (final)
~"9E-5 Palo Verde 9.OE-5 D. C. Cook 1/2 6.3E-5 Kewaunce 6E-5 Comanche Peak 5.7E-5 Millstone 5.6E-5 Trojan 5.5E-5 Seabrook 5.5E-5 o San Onofre 2/3 3.5E-5 Indian Point 2 3.1E-5 Zion 1/2 4E-6
Level 1 Preliminary Results 45%
29%
15%
11%
Transient LOCA LOP Other Total Core Damage Frequency ~ 3.5E-5 /yr
Anticipated Impact Possible minor design modifications Several procedure changes