IR 05000285/1996099
| ML20100P902 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 03/04/1996 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20100P904 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-285-96-99, NUDOCS 9603110400 | |
| Download: ML20100P902 (6) | |
Text
..
.
FORT CALHOUN STATION SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE Report 50-285/96-99 I.
BACKGROUND An NRC SALP Board, comprised of the individuals listed below, met on February 6. 1996, to review and assess safety performance at Fort Calhoun Station during the period July 31, 1994, through January 27, 1996.
The Board was conducted in accordance with NRC Management Directive 8.6. " Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance." The resulting assessment was reviewed and approved by the Region IV Administrator.
Board Chairman K' E. Brockman Deputy Director. Division of Reactor Safety. Region.IV
.
Board Members A. T. Howell. Deputy Director. Division of Reactor Projects. Region IV W. H. Bateman. Director. Project Directorate IV-2. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Functional _ Areas and Ratings:
Functional Area This' Period Previous Period Operations-
2 Maintenance
2 Engineering
1 Plant Support
1 II.
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS A.
Plant Ooerations Overall performance in the operations area reflected a good safety perspective. Management oversight and involvement continued to be strong. A conservative operating philosophy in response to equipment failures and off-normal events was consistently demonstrated: however, routine operations continued to pose challenges to the control room staff.
Programs and procedures were generally good.
Problem identification was a strength, but 3roblem resolution was protracted or performance was ineffective in certain (ey areas. A few months before the end of the assessment period, enhancement efforts were initiated, but the SALP period ended without sufficient time to validate improved performance.
9603110400 960304 PDR ADOCK 05000285 G
'
.
.
. -.
.
.
-2-l Management involvement in day-to-day operations was extensive.
Probabilistic i
risk analysis information was applied to on-line maintenance and other
'
'
activities.
The daily morning meetings concentrated on emergent work and l
operations priorities. The condition report review group was effective in
providing an independent focus on newly generated condition reports.
After l
concerns were identified early in the assessment period about training
,
-
l effectiveness, management involvement with, and support of training programs l
increased.
l Operator and operations department performance in response to off-normal l
events remained excellent. When immediate-response events occurred, operators focused on those actions important to safety and management applied conservative decision making.
The manual trip of the reactor following two instances of component cooling water leakage into a reactor coolant pump lube l
oil heat exchanger demonstrated this conservatism.
'
In contrast, the operations department's response to the problems and
challenges of routine operations did not demonstrate the same consistently
,
high performance level.
Problems during routine operations were attributable
!
to.three factors.
First the operating staff did not always exhibit leadership in overall station operations. An example of this weakness is the
!
fact that operations did not bring to resolution many of the long-standing l
equipment problems that have impacted operational efficiency.
Second. crew l
interactions were not as precise and formal as those practiced during time l
critical activities.
Third. the operations staff was slow to support and respond to management's efforts to improve performance.
Programs and procedures used in operations were generally good; however, there were several deficiencies which had operational impacts.
Procedural deficiencies contributed to leaving t1e emergency diesel generator outside the
,
l design emergency starting condition following the conduct of surveillance testing, and to improperly moving heavy loads over irradiated fuel.
Also, l
little progress was made in implementing the labelling and procedure upgrade programs.
Self assessments were effective in identifying problems, but corrective
'
actions were not always effective in bringing identified problems to
!
resolution.
For example, in early 1995 your self assessment identified r
. numerous control room equipment and design deficiencies: however, o)erations i
has not ensured that the correction of these issues has received a ligh enough l
priority level, and as a result many of the identified deficiencies have l
remained uncorrected.
From a positive perspective, you identified that i
operators believed that departmental initiatives and communications were generally top-down with little opportunity for response or feedback: in response, you initiated a new corrective action program to promote l
participation all levels of the organization.
T1is new program was initiated
late in the assessment period -- the results will be determined in the future.
,
The performance rating in the Operations area is Category 2.
.
-_ _
.
.. -
--
..
..
. - -
- -
--
- -.
..
--
.
.
.
3-B.
Maintenance Maintenance performance was very good.
Management involvement and oversight was evident throughout the assessment period. Maintenance programs were well developed, and enhancements in the planning and scheduling processes greatly improved schedule effectiveness. A number of long-standing and re)etitive equipment problems were resolved during this assessment period.
T1e conduct of maintenance and surveillance activities was good; however, there were many shortcomings during the refueling outage and there was a performance decline in the conduct of on-line maintenance during the last few months of the assessment period.
Management continued to foster a questioning attitude relative to problem identification and in most cases resolved identified concerns in a prompt and thorough manner.
Management and supervision continued to demonstrate a high level of involvement in maintenance activities, including the oversight of field work and work planning.
Emergent work was prioritized and procedures for evaluating the risk of emergent work were established. The licensee established a maintenance schedule for risk significant equipment which was based on insights from the plant's individual plant examination.
The overall material condition of the plant was good.
Management attention during the latter part of the SALP period resulted in the resolution of a number of long-standing and recurring operator work-arounds, and plant and control room deficiencies.
Boric acid leaks and a degraded level of cleanliness in some areas of the plant detracted from the overall good level of material condition and cleanliness.
Maintenance programs continued to be a strength. A significant reduction in the corrective maintenance backlog resulted, in part, from enhancements to the planning and scheduling 3rocesses. The preventive maintenance program was effective, as evidenced ay a small backlog and the incorporation of risk considerations into maintenance and surveillance activities.
The overall performance of maintenance and surveillance activities remained good, but performance problems occurred throughout the assessment period.
During the refueling outage there were several instances of less than superior performance lapses (e.g., dro) ped shipping cask. improper heavy load movement); and, during the last 6 montis of the SALP period, there were several challenges associated with a lack of attention to detail, performing work which exceeded the scope of the work documents. and performing work without the required work instructions.
Additionally, a reactor trip was caused by licensed operator personnel error during the conduct of a surveillance activity.
Overall-procedural quality was good.
There were some instances of inadequate work instructions. 3articularly those involving troubleshooting.
Also, while the reactor vessel lead was removed and fuel was in the core the procedures associated with the heavy load movement did not require containment integrity.
.
- -
-
. - -. - - -. - -. - -
. _ - -
-
_
. - =.
.
f
.
-4-
i
Problem identification and resolution by maintenance were very good.
Personnel throughout the organization exhibited a questioning attitude
-
'
relative to plant and equipment safety.
Several programmatic problems were identifled by the licensee through the use of external assessments and through
,
the performance enhancement program.
The licensee implemented a number of
'
actions to address identified issues.
The performance rating in the Maintenance area is Category 2.
f
C.
Enaineerina i
'
Overall, engineering aerformance continued to be superior, with a strong safety perspective. Most concerns expressed in the previous SALP report were
!
satisfactorily addressed.
Effective programs have been established for controlling temporary modifications, tracking and testing plant modifications,
reporting problem conditions, and assuring o Normally, operability evaluations were well performed,perational safety.
and management goals and ariorities were effectively communicated.
Engineering work products were of ligh quality reflecting a strong technical capability.
Self assessments identified areas needing improvement, determined the root causes of the problem areas, and proposed. appropriate corrective actions.
The engineering organization consistently demonstrated conservatism with
regard to plant safety.
Management was proactive in instituting programs for
assessing system performance, determining system reliability, and trending
.
equipment history (e.g., system report cards and notebooks).
Engineering support to the plant was evident in both day-to-day activities and long-term planning.
However, there were isolated examples of inattention to detail and delays in communicating pertinent information which detracted from overall
,
performance.
Exam)1es of these shortcomings include the control room air conditioning opera)ility determination, and the analyses concerning the diesel generator temperature limits and governor control switch.
Engineering programs and procedures were well-develo)ed. The erosion /
corrosion and temporary modification programs, and t7e Probabilistic Risk Analysis Oversight Committee were all noted strengths. A lack of control measures for maintaining adequate quantities of tri-sodium phosphate for emergency shutdown conditions and inconsistencies between various design documents indicated, however, that additional emphasis on design basis control is warranted.
Production Engineering played a key role in assuring plant safety and providing quality support to plant activities. The 10 CFR 50.59 review process was effectively implemented.
Design Engineering was actively involved in the station modification review team and daily emergent issues work meetings.
During the refueling outage, design engineers were integrated into the in-)lant staff, enabling them to gain better insight into plant activities and pro)lems.
Probabilistic risk analysis insights were incorporated into the i
design process.
System Engineering support to both plant operations and maintenance was ccnsidered superior.
System engineers were knowledgeable, and demonstrated commitment and ownership of their assigned systems.
L
.]
.
-
.
[
-5-j The licensee performed high quality self-assessment and engineering reviews.
- Some shortcomings were noted, however, in bringing corrective actions to a final resolution. There were two instances (RMS-9 circuit breaker: turbine-
driven auxiliary feedwater pump control switch) where root-cause analyses were l
not as timely or thorough as desired.
Also, there were isolated instances i
where engineering did not communicate relatively important information to
,
affected organizations in'a timely manner.
The licensee recently implemented a new condition reporting system to address these weaknesses.
The performr.3 rating in the Engineering area is Category 1.
D.
E]m Jyo2cr1
r
Performance in the plant support area continued at the superior level demonstrated during the previous SALP period.
Radiological controls performance was effective in dealing with the challenges presented by poor fuel performance.
The emergency preparedness program was consistent, with effective communications channels with off-site response organizations.
!
Security performance was exceptional, and demonstrated both management
. commitment and technical competence.
The fire protection and housekeeping programs were effectively implemented.
,
The radiological control practices at the station were very good..The
'
radiological protection organization is staffed with highly trained and qualified personnel, and is committed to continual improvement of individual
qualifications.
Personnel exposure continued at a low level, in spite of the i
increase in general area radiation rates associated with fuel problems, i
Contaminated areas were well posted and controlled, and radiation area i
postings were comprehensive and effective. An emphasis on job i
shielding, and radiation worker practices within the as-low-as pre-planning, reasonably-i achievable (ALARA) program was effective in mitigating the effects of the j
increased source term. There were, however.1solated instances where a lack
'
of attention to detail by radiation workers resulted in access control and other administrative problems. The licensee used excellent quality assurance audits and surveillances. with critical self assessments, to maintain program
'
effectiveness.
'
The emergency planning function was effectively implemented.
Personnel were well trained.
Simulator performance shortcomings concerning the timeliness of
off-site notifications were quickly and effectively addressed, and there were no performance shortcomings identified during actual response opportunities.
Effective communications channels were maintained with off-site response i
_ organizations and decision makers. Comprehensive audits and surveillances l
' contributed to program effectiveness and consistency.
Performance in the security area continued to be superior.
Worker and management cooperation was evident.
Both assessment and control equipment
,
l were maintained in a high state of repair.
When needed, compensatory actions were effectively implemented. The traming for and qualifications of the t
i l
._. _.. _ _.. _
_
. -.
.
-. -
.
C
..
I
.
t 6-
,
t security staff reflected both an individual and organizational commitment to excellence.
Self assessments were an integral part of the organizational i
. philosophy and were effectively used as a means to: improve performance.
,
t
.
'The fire protection and housekeeping programs at the' station were effectively implemented.
Occasional instances of combustible material. control and general housekeeping shortcomings were effectively addressed by the licensee,
.
The performance rating in the Plant Support area is Category 1.
.
,
<
I i
l
,
i
.
I a
)
!
l i
I
.