IR 05000272/2009004
| ML093080046 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 11/04/2009 |
| From: | Arthur Burritt Reactor Projects Branch 3 |
| To: | Joyce T Public Service Enterprise Group |
| BURRITT, AL | |
| References | |
| IR-09-004 | |
| Download: ML093080046 (31) | |
Text
November 14, 2009 Memo for the File Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 NRC Integrated Inspection Report, dated November 4,2009
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ber 4, 2009
SUBJECT:
SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 NRC INTEGRATED INSPECTION REPORT 05000272/2009004 and 05000311/2009004
Dear Mr. Joyce:
On September 30,2009, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at the Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2. The enclosed report documents the inspection results discussed on October 5, 2009, with Mr. Braun and other members of your staff.
The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commission's rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license.
The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel.
Based on the results of this inspection, no findings of significance were identified.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html(the Public Electronic Reading Room).
Sincerely, IRA!
Arthur L. Burritt, Chief Division of Reactor Projects Projects Branch 3 Docket Nos: 50-272; 50-311 License Nos: DPR-70; DPR-75 Enclosure: Inspection Report 05000272/2009004 and 05000311/2009004 w/Attachment: Supplemental Information cc: w/encls: Distribution via ListServ
Mr. Thomas
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
IR 05000272/2009004,05000311/2009004; 07/01/2009 - 09/30/2009; Salem Nuclear
Generating Station Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Routine Integrated Report.
The report covered a three-month period of inspection by resident inspectors, and announced inspections by a regional radiation specialist and a regional operator licensing specialist. The NRC's program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, "Reactor Oversight Process," Revision 4, dated December 2006.
No findings of significance were identified.
REPORT DETAILS
Summary of Plant Status
Salem Nuclear Generating Station Unit No.1 (Unit 1) began the period at full power. On September 26, operators lowered Unit 1 to 86% power to conduct main turbine valve testing.
Operators returned Unit 1 to full power the same day. Unit 1 operated at or near full power for the remainder of the inspection period.
Salem Nuclear Generating Station Unit No.2 (Unit 2) began the period at full power. Unit 2 operated at or near full power for the duration of the inspection period.
REACTOR SAFETY
Cornerstones: Initiating Events, Mitigating Systems, Barrier Integrity, Emergency Preparedness
1R01 Adverse Weather Protection (71111.01 - 1 Sample)
.1 !;:valuate Readiness to Cope with External Flooding
a. Inspection Scope
During the week of September 8,2009, the inspectors completed one adverse weather protection inspection sample. The inspectors reviewed PSEG's preparations and compensatory measures for severe weather conditions that posed a risk of flooding.
The inspectors interviewed engineering and operations personnel regarding the actions taken to prepare for the impending severe weather and walked down risk significant systems to independently assess the adequacy of PSEG's preparations. Specifically, the inspectors reviewed the condition of service water intake structure (SWIS) external flood protection. The inspectors verified that degraded conditions with the potential to impact safety-related systems and components were reported in the corrective action program (CAP). Corrective action notifications written for degraded conditions were reviewed to ensure that operability of the affected components in the SWIS was not impacted. For those areas where operator actions were credited for maintaining safety related system operability during a flooding event, the inspectors also verified that the procedures used to direct those actions could be fully implemented during the event.
Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
1R04 Equipment Alignment (71111.04 - 3 Samples)
.1 Partial Walkdown
a. Inspection Scope
Tine inspectors completed three partial equipment alignment inspection samples. The inspectors walked down the systems to verify the operability of redundant or diverse trains and components when safety equipment was unavailable. The inspectors focused their review on potential discrepancies that could impact the function of the system and increase plant risk. The inspectors reviewed applicable operating procedures, walked down control system components, and verified that selected breakers, valves, and support equipment were in the correct position to support system operation. The inspectors also verified that PSEG properly utilized its corrective action program to identify and resolve equipment alignment problems that could cause initiating events or impact the capability of mitigating systems or barriers. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment. The inspectors walked down the systems listed below:
- Unit 1 service water (SW) on September 14 just prior to unavailability of the 11 and 15 SW pumps for de-silting of the associated bays;
- Unit 1 emergency diesel generators (EDG) on September 30 during planned unavailability of the 1A EDG.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
1R05 Fire Protection (71111.050 6 Samples)
.1 Fire Protection - Tours
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors completed six quarterly fire protection inspection samples. The inspectors conducted tours of the areas listed below to assess the material condition and operational status of fire protection features. The inspectors verified that combustibles and ignition sources were controlled in accordance with PSEG's administrative procedures; fire detection and suppression equipment was available for use; that passive fire barriers were maintained in good material condition; and that compensatory measures for out-of-service, degraded, or inoperable fire protection equipment were implemented in accordance with PSEG's fire plan. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment.
- Unit 1 and Unit 2 4160V Switchgear Rooms;
- Unit 1 and Unit 2 Diesel Generator Area Elevations 100' and 122';
- Unit 1 and Unit 2 Charging Pumps and Spray Additive Tank Areas.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
1 R06 Flood Protection Measures (71111.06 - 1 Sample)
.1 Underground Bunkers/Manholes Subject to Flooding
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors completed one flood protection measures inspection sample. The inspectors evaluated the condition of safety-related cables located in underground bunkers and manholes. Specifically, the inspectors examined photographic evidence of conditions in manhole vault MH-SWI-1 and directly inspected conditions in the service water tunnel and service water trench. The inspectors verified that safety-related cables are not submerged in water, the integrity of cables and splices, the condition of cable support structures, and the ability to dewater these structures.
In addition, the inspectors evaluated the impact of structures recently constructed above the service water electrical cable vaults. Specifically, PSEG constructed concrete egress pads west of the Unit 1 fuel handling building (FHB) to support movement of spent fuel from the spent fuel pool to dry cask storage pad. The inspectors evaluated provisions made to adequately support the weight of the egress pad and fuel movement equipment.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
1R 11 Licensed Operator Regualification Program (71111.11 Q 1 Sample, 71111.11 B-1 Sample)
.1 Requalification Activities Review by Resident Staff.
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors completed one quarterly licensed operator requalification program inspection sample. Specifically, the inspectors observed two annual licensed operator requalification operating tests administered to a single crew on July 13, 2009. The first scenario consisted of a routine rod control problem, a steam generator water level instrument failure, a main turbine runback caused by a stator water malfunction, a power reduction necessitated by axial flux distribution out of normal band, and a reactor coolant leak that degraded to a large break loss of coolant accident that was compounded by malfunctions in a safeguards equipment cabinet and the containment spray system. The second scenario consisted of a main turbine governor valve malfunction, a power range nuclear instrument failure that required operators to remove the nuclear instrument from service, an additional main turbine governor valve failure that necessitated a rapid load reduction, a main steam leak downstream of main steam isolation valves compounded by a main steam isolation valve failure to close, and a steam generator tube rupture.
The inspectors reviewed operator actions to implement the abnormal and emergency operating procedures. The inspectors examined the operators' ability to perform actions associated with high-risk activities, the Emergency Plan, previous lessons learned items, and the correct use and implementation of procedures. The inspectors observed and reviewed the training evaluator's critique of operator performance and verified that deficiencies were adequately identified, discussed, and entered into the corrective action program, as appropriate. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified .
.2 Biennial Review by Regional Specialist.
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors completed one biennial requalification program inspection sample. The following inspection activities were performed using NUREG-1021, Rev. 9, Supplement 1, "Operator Licensing Examination Standards for Power Reactors," Inspection Procedure Attachment 71111.11, "Licensed Operator Requalification Program," NRC Manual Chapter 0609, Appendix I, "Operator Requalification Human Performance Significance Determination Process (SOP)," and 10 CFR 55.46, "Simulator Rule," as acceptance criteria.
A review was conducted of recent operating history documentation found in inspection reports, PSEG's corrective action program, and the most recent NRC plant issues matrix. The inspectors also reviewed specific events from the PSEG's corrective action program that indicated possible training deficiencies, to verify they had been addressed appropriately. The resident inspectors were also consulted for insights regarding licensed operators' performance. These reviews did not detect any operational events that were indicative of possible training deficiencies. The documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment.
The inspectors reviewed two sets of 2008 comprehensive biennial written exams, and three sets of scenarios and job performance measures (JPMs) administered during this current exam cycle (2009) to verify that the quality of these exams met the criteria established in the Examination Standards and 10 CFR 55.59.
Tile week of the inspection, the inspectors observed the administration of operating examinations to one operating crew. The operating examinations consisted of two simulator scenarios and one set of five JPMs administered to each individual.
Conformance with operator license conditions was verified by reviewing the following records:
- Reviewed two crews' medical records and confirmed all records were complete, that restrictions noted by the doctor were reflected on the individual's license, and that the exams were given within 24 months.
- Proficiency watch-standing and reactivation records. A sample of two licensed operator reactivation records and a sample of watch-standing documentation were reviewed to ensure time on shift was current and conformed with the requirements of 10 CFR 55.
- Remediation training records for one licensed operator were reviewed for the past two-year training cycle.
The inspectors interviewed instructors, training and operations management personnel, and reviewed feedback records to ensure the requalification program was meeting the needs of the operators and was responsive to their noted deficiencies and recommended changes.
For the site specific simulator, the inspectors observed simulator performance during the conduct of the examinations, and reviewed discrepancy reports to verify compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 55.46.
The inspectors reviewed a sample of simulator tests including transients, steady state operations, and malfunction tests. The inspectors verified that a sample of completed simulator work requests and notifications from the past two-year period effectively addressed each issue. The specific simulator tests reviewed are listed in the
.
This annual operating exam administration cycle will be completed in the fourth quarter of calendar year 2009. Pass/fail results will be reported in the next quarterly resident inspector report.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
1R 12 Maintenance Effectiveness (71111
.12 Q - 3 Samples)
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors completed three quarterly maintenance effectiveness inspection samples. The inspectors reviewed performance monitoring and maintenance effectiveness issues for the three samples listed below. The inspectors reviewed PSEG's process for monitoring equipment performance and assessing preventive maintenance effectiveness, and verified that systems and components were monitored in accordance with the maintenance rule program requirements. The inspectors compared documented functional failure determinations and unavailability hours to those being tracked by PSEG to evaluate the effectiveness of PSEG's condition monitoring activities and to determine whether performance goals were being met. The inspectors reviewed applicable work orders, corrective action notifications, and preventive maintenance tasks. Documents reviewed for this inspection are listed in the
.
- Service water chiller condenser recirculation pump discharge check valves SW99
- Unit 2 auxiliary building ventilation (ABV) supply fan 21
- Unit 1 100 foot elevation personnel airlock b.
findings No findings of significance were identified.
1R 13 ~Aaintenance Risk Assessments and Emergent Work Control (71111.13 6 Samples)a.
~1spection Scope The inspectors completed six maintenance risk assessment and emergent work control inspection samples. The inspectors reviewed the maintenance activities listed below to verify that the appropriate risk assessments were performed as specified by 10 CFR 50.65(a)(4) prior to removing equipment from service for maintenance. The inspectors reviewed the applicable risk evaluations, work schedules and control room logs for these configurations. PSEG's risk management actions were reviewed during shift turnover meetings, control room tours, and plant walk downs. The inspectors also used PSEG's on-line risk monitor (Equipment Out-Of-Service workstation) to gain insights into the risk associated with these plant configurations. The inspectors reviewed notifications documenting problems associated with risk assessments and emergent work evaluations to verify the issues were entered into the corrective action program.
Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment.
- Unit 1 planned unavailability of the 11 component cooling (CC) heat exchanger concurrent with planned unavailability of the 13 containment fan coil unit (CFCU) on July 14.
- Unit 1 emergent unavailability of the 14 station power transformer (SPT) during adverse weather concurrent with planned unavailability of the 11 service water pump (SWP) and planned maintenance on the 138 circulating water condenser water box on August 20.
- Unit 2 unplanned unavailability of the 2A vital instrument bus inverter on August 14.
- Unit 1 and 2 during planned unavailability of Unit 1 control room emergency air conditioning system (CREACS) concurrent with planned unavailability of the station gas turbine generator and 11 service water pump on September 14.
- Unit 2 planned unavailability of the 4 station lighting power (SLP-4) transformer and the station gas turbine generator concurrent with blocked automatic actuation of pressurizer power operated relief valve 2PR2 on September 17.
- Unit 1 planned unavailability of the 1A EDG on September 30.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
1R15 Operability Evaluations (71111.15 - 5 Samples)
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors completed five operability evaluation inspection samples. The inspectors mviewed the operability determinations for degraded or non-conforming conditions associated with:
- Offsite power supplies given failure of the 14 Station Power Tranformer (STP) Load Tap Changer (LTC);
- Degraded conduit located at the Unit 1 and Unit 2 intake structures;
- Service water system given reduced material strength of the service water strainer (SWS) rotating elements caused by de-alloying of the metal while in service;
- Unit 2 rod control system given degradation of individual rod position indication (IRPI) for rod 2B4-2; and
- Unit 1 emergency core cooling system (ECCS) containment sump level indication.
The inspectors reviewed the technical adequacy of the operability determinations to ensure the conclusions were justified. The inspectors walked down accessible equipment to corroborate the adequacy of PSEG's operability determinations.
Additionally, the inspectors reviewed other PSEG identified safety-related equipment deficiencies during this report period and assessed the adequacy of their operability screenings. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
1R18 Plant Modifications (71111.18 1 Sample)
.1 Temporary Modification
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors completed one plant modification inspection sample. The inspectors rE~viewed a temporary modification developed to restore alarm capability to the 11 steam generator feed pump (SGFP). The vibration alarm was actuating frequently in the control room, due to the elevated vibration on the pump outboard bearing. The temporary modification raised the alarm and danger set points. Inspectors verified that the new set points were developed using existing station procedures. The alarm set point was verified to be high enough to eliminate nuisance alarms and low enough to alert the plant operators of a change in the current condition of the pump, providing a warning prior to the vibrations reaching the danger level.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
1R19 Post-Maintenance Testing (71111.19 - 9 Samples)
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors completed nine post-maintenance testing inspection samples. The inspectors reviewed the post-maintenance tests for the maintenance activities listed below to verify that procedures and test activities ensured system operability and functional capability following the completion of maintenance. The inspectors verified that the effect of testing on the plant was adequately addressed by control room personnel and risk assessment engineering; testing was adequate for the maintenance performed; acceptance criteria were clear, demonstrated operational readiness and were consistent with design and licensing basis documentation; test instrumentation was calibrated, and the appropriate range and accuracy for the application; tests were performed, as written, with applicable prerequisites satisfied; and equipment was returned to an operational status and ready to perform its safety function. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment.
- Replacement of the 21 auxiliary building ventilation (ABV) supply fan belt, WO 30142044
- Repair of 100 foot elevation containment airlock, WO 60084993
- Repair of the 14 Station Power Tranformer (STP) Load Tap Changer (LTC), WO 60085524
- Replacement of the 1A EDG 4kV output breaker (1AD1AX6D), WO 30103946
- Planned maintenance for the 2A 1 125 VDC battery charger, WO 50113534
- Planned maintenance for the 11 SW42 diesel generator service water flow controller, WO 30151429
- Planned maintenance for the 22 auxiliary feed water (AFW) pump discharge pressure transmitter, WO 30125415
- Planned maintenance for the station blackout diesel control air compressor, WO 30183591
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
1R22 Surveillance Testing (71111.22 7 Samples)
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors completed seven surveillance testing inspection samples. The inspectors observed portions of and/or reviewed results for the surveillance tests listed below to verify, as appropriate, whether the applicable system requirements for operability were adequately incorporated into the procedures and that test acceptance criteria were consistent with procedure requirements, the technical specification requirements, the UFSAR, and ASME Section XI for pump and valve testing.
Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment. The inspectors evaluated the surveillance tests listed below:
- S2.0P-ST.RHR-0001, 21 RHR Pump Inservice Test (1ST) on July 2;
- S2.0P-STDG-0005, 22 Fuel Oil Transfer System Operability Test on July 10;
- S2.0P-ST.DG-0012, 2A Diesel Generator Endurance Run on July 27;
- S1.0P-LR.CAN-0001, 100 Foot Elevation Containment Airlock Leak Rate Testing on July 23;
- S2.0P-ST.AF-0002, 22 AFW Pump 1ST on August 2;
- S2.0P-ST.RHR-0002, 22 RHR Pump 1ST on August 6; and
- S2.IC-CC.RC-0094, PZR Safety Valve Discharge Temperature on August 18.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
1EP6 Drill Evaluation (71114.06 - 1 Sample)
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors completed one drill evaluation inspection sample. On July 13, the inspectors observed a drill from the control room simulator during an annual licensed operator requalification examination scenario. The inspectors evaluated operator performance relative to developing event classifications and notifications. The inspectors reviewed the Salem Event Classification Guides. The inspectors referenced Nuclear Energy Institute 99-02, "Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator (PI)
Guideline," Revision 5, and verified that PSEG correctly counted the evaluated scenario's contribution to the NRC PI for drill and exercise performance.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
RADIATION SAFETY
CI:>rnerstone: Public Radiation Safety 2PS3 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) and Radioactive Material Control Program (71122.03 - 10 Samples)
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors reviewed the most current Annual Environmental Monitoring Report (AEMR) and licensee assessment results to verify that the REMP was implemented as required by Technical Specifications (TS) and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM). The review included changes to the ODCM with respect to environmental monitoring, commitments in terms of sampling locations, monitoring and measurement frequencies, land use census, inter-laboratory comparison program, and analysis of data. The inspectors reviewed the ODCM to identify environmental monitoring stations.
The inspectors reviewed licensee self assessments, audits, licensee event reports, and inter-laboratory comparison program results. The inspectors reviewed the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) for information regarding the environmental monitoring program and meteorological monitoring instrumentation. The inspectors reviewed the scope of the PSEG's audit program to verify that it met the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1101 (c).
The inspectors walked-down the six air particulate and iodine sampling stations, two broad leaf vegetation stations and 37 direct reading monitoring stations. The inspectors verified that they were located as described in the ODCM and that the equipment material condition was acceptable.
The inspectors observed the collection and preparation of a variety of environmental samples (e.g., vegetation and ground and surface water). The inspectors verified that environmental sampling was representative of the release pathways as specified in the ODCM and that sampling techniques were in accordance with procedures.
Based on direct observation and review of records, the inspectors verified that the meteorological instruments were operable, calibrated, and maintained in accordance with guidance contained in the FSAR, NRC Safety Guide 23, and licensee procedures.
The inspectors reviewed each event documented in the Annual Environmental Monitoring Report that involved a missed sample, inoperable sampler, lost thermo luminescent dosimeter (TLD), or anomalous measurement for the cause and corrective actions. The inspectors also reviewed PSEG's assessment of any positive sample n~sults (Le., licensed radioactive material detected above the lower limits of detection (LLDs)) and reviewed the associated radioactive effluent release data that was the likely source of the released material.
The inspectors reviewed any significant changes made by PSEG to the ODCM due to changes to the land census or sampler station modifications since the last inspection.
The inspectors also reviewed technical justifications for any changed sampling locations and verified that PSEG performed the reviews required to ensure that the changes did not affect its ability to monitor the impacts of radioactive effluent releases on the environment.
The inspectors reviewed the calibration and maintenance records for air samplers and composite water samplers. The inspectors reviewed PSEG's calibration records for the environmental sample radiation measurement instrumentation. The inspectors verified that the appropriate detection sensitivities, as specified in the TS/ODCM, were utilized for counting samples. The inspectors reviewed quality control charts for maintaining radiation measurement instrument status and any actions taken to address degrading detector performance. The inspectors reviewed the results of PSEG's inter-laboratory comparison program to verify the adequacy of environmental sample analyses performed by PSEG. The inspectors also reviewed PSEG's quality control evaluation for the inter-laboratory comparison program and the corrective actions for any deficiencies. The inspectors reviewed quality assurance (QA) audit results of the program to verify that PSEG met the TS/ODCM requirements. The inspectors completed these activities via direct observation at the PSEG Maplewood Testing Laboratory.
Tlhe inspectors observed several locations where PSEG monitors potentially contaminated material leaving the radiologically controlled area (RCA) and inspected the methods used for control, survey, and release from these areas. When possible, the inspectors observed the performance of personnel surveying and releasing material for unrestricted use to verify that the work was performed in accordance with plant procedures.
The inspectors verified that the radiation monitoring instrumentation used was appropriate for the radiation types present and was calibrated with appropriate radiation sources. The inspectors reviewed PSEG's criteria for the survey and release of potentially contaminated material. The inspectors verified that there was guidance on how to respond to an alarm that indicated the presence of licensed radioactive material.
The inspectors reviewed PSEG's equipment to ensure the radiation detection sensitivity was consistent with the NRC guidance contained in IE Circular 81-07 and IE Information Notice 85-92 for surface contamination and HPPOS-221 for volumetrically contaminated material. The inspectors also reviewed PSEG's procedures and records to verify that the radiation detection instrumentation was used at its typical sensitivity level based on appropriate counting. The inspectors verified that PSEG had not established a "release limit" by altering the instrument's typical sensitivity through such methods as raising the energy discriminator level or locating the instrument in a high radiation background area.
The inspectors reviewed PSEG's licensee event reports (LER), Special Reports (SR),audits, and self-assessments related to the radiological environmental monitoring program performed since the last inspection. The inspectors verified that identified problems were entered into the corrective action program for resolution.
The inspectors reviewed corrective action notifications that affected environmental sampling, sample analysis, or meteorological monitoring instrumentation. The inspectors also interviewed staff and reviewed corrective action program documents to verify that the following activities were conducted in an effective and timely manner commensurate with their importance to safety and risk:
Initial problem identification, characterization, and tracking.
Disposition of operability/reportability issues.
Evaluation of safety Significance/risk and priority for resolution.
Identification of repetitive problems.
5. Identification of contributing causes.
Identification and implementation of effective corrective actions.
Resolution of non-cited violations (I\lCVs) tracked in corrective action system(s).
Implementation/consideration of risk significant operational experience feedback.
In cases where the inspectors identified repetitive or significant deficiencies in corrective action program implementation, the inspectors verified that PSEG's self-assessment activities were also identifying and addressing deficiencies in this area.
The inspectors evaluated PSEG's performance in these areas against the requirements contained in 10 CFR 50.36, 10 CFR 50, Appendix I, and Plant Technical Specification 6.9.1.7.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
OTHER ACTIVITIES
40A1 Performance Indicator (PI) Verification (71151 - 6 Samples)
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors completed six performance indicator verification inspection samples.
The inspectors reviewed PSEG submittals for the Unit 1 and Unit 2 Mitigating Systems cornerstone performance indicators discussed below. Data reviewed was for the third and fourth quarters of 2008, as well as the first and second quarters of 2009. To verify the accuracy of the PI data reported during this period the data was compared to the PI definition and guidance contained in Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99-02, "Regulatory Assessment Performance Indicator Guideline," Revision 5.
Cornerstone: Mitigating Systems
- Unit 1 and Unit 2 Heat Removal System MSPI
- Unit 1 and Unit 2 Residual Heat Removal System MSPI
- Unit 1 and Unit 2 Cooling Water Systems MSPI
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
40A2 Identification and Resolution of Problems (71152 - 1 Sample)
.1 Review of Items Entered into the Corrective Action Program:
a. Inspection Scope
As required by Inspection Procedure 71152, "Identification and Resolution of Problems,"
and in order to help identify repetitive equipment failures or specific human performance issues for follow-up, the inspectors performed a daily screening of all items entered into PSEG's corrective action program. This was accomplished by reviewing the description of each new notification and attending daily management review committee meetings.
Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment.
b. Findings and Observations
No findings of significance were identified .
.2 Annual Sample: Review of Operator Workaround Program
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors conducted a cumulative review of operator workarounds for Unit 1 and 2 and assessed the effectiveness of PSEG's operator workaround program. The inspectors reviewed PSEG's operator burden list, control room distraction report, and an operator burden self-assessment. The inspectors focused on the potential impact on mitigating systems and the potential to affect operator ability to implement abnormal and emergency operating procedures. The review included interviews with licensed operators and walk downs of main control room panels.
b. F~ndings and Observations No findings of Significance were identified.
PSEG identified eleven operator challenges at Unit 1 and 2, but none of the challenges were classified as operator workarounds. The inspectors did not identify additional operator challenges or workarounds. The inspectors reviewed OP-AA-102-103, "Operator Work-around Program", and OP-AA-102-103-1001, "Operator Burdens Program", for PSEG program requirements and found that PSEG adequately implemented these procedures. The most recent quarterly operator burden assessment was reviewed for each unit. The inspectors determined that the cumulative impact of the identified operator challenges was within manageable limits. Documents reviewed are listed in the Attachment.
40A5 Other Activities
.1 Ouarterly Resident Inspector Observations of Security Personnel and Activities
a. Inspection Scope
During the inspection period, the inspectors conducted observations of security force personnel and activities to ensure that the activities were consistent with PSEG security procedures and regulatory requirements related to nuclear plant security. These observations took place during both normal and off-normal plant working hours. These quarterly resident inspector observations of security force personnel and activities did not constitute any additional inspection samples. Rather, they were considered an integral part of the inspectors' normal plant status review and inspection activities.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
40A6 lVieetings, Including Exit The inspectors presented the inspection results to Mr. R. Braun and other members of PSEG management at the conclusion of the inspection on October 5, 2009. The inspectors asked PSEG whether any materials examined during the inspection were proprietary. No proprietary information was identified.
ATTACHMENT:
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
KEY POINTS OF CONTACT
Licensee personnel
R. Braun Salem Site Vice President
L. Rajkowski Engineering Director
M. Gwirtz Operations Director
R. DeSanctis Maintenance Director
E. Eilola Plant Manager
B. Gary Radiation Protection Manager
D. Boyle Nuclear Specialist III
C. Pupek Operations Engineer
W. Kittle Senior Engineer Nuclear
M. Rahmani Senior Engineer Nuclear
J. Higgins Principal Nuclear Engineer
L. Oberembt System Manager
S. Bowers Staff Engineer Nuclear
S. Crampton Staff Engineer Nuclear
F. Hummel Staff Engineer Nuclear
S. Davies Principal Nuclear Engineer