IR 05000335/1998099
| ML17229A833 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 08/11/1998 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17229A832 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-335-98-99, 50-389-98-99, NUDOCS 9808200202 | |
| Download: ML17229A833 (7) | |
Text
SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE ST.
LUCIE NUCLEAR PLANT 50-335/98-99 AND 50-389/98-99 BACKGROUND The SALP board convened on July 16.
1998, to assess the nuclear safety performance of the St. Lucie Nuclear Plant for the period March 30.
1997. through June 27, 1998.
The board was conducted in accordance with Management Directive 8.6,
"Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance."
Board Members were C. A. Casto (Board Chairperson).
Deputy Director, Division of Reactor Projects; B. S. Mallett. Director, Division of Reactor Safety; and F. J.
Hebdon, Director, Project Directorate II-3, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
This Assessment was reviewed and approved by the Regional Administrator.
PLANT OPERATIONS This functional area assesses the control and execution of activities directly related to operating the plant.
It includes activities such as plant startup, power operation, plant shutdown, and system lineups.
Thus, it includes activities such as monitoring and logging plant conditions.
normal operations, response to transient and off-normal conditions, adequacy and implementation of emergency operating procedures and abnormal operating procedures.
manipulating the reactor and auxi liary controls, and control room professionalism.
It includes initial and requalification training of licensed operators.
Overall performance in the area of Plant Operations was good during this assessment period.
Improvement was noted throughout the Operations functional area, specifically in areas where challenges existed in the previous SALP assessment.
Management oversight and involvement was evident and helped to ensure reliable and safe operation of the plant.
Operators demonstrated their competency during normal operations, transients, and outages.
During the assessment period, overall control room conduct and coordination continued to improve.
In the previous SALP assessment period, adherence to procedures and procedural adequacy were challenges.
During this period, procedure upgrade efforts were initiated which resulted in improved availability of curJ'ent versions and more usable procedures.
At the end of the assessment period, the licensee continued to implement a procedure improvement program.
During the previous SALP assessment, deficiencies in identifying equipment configuration discrepancies was an area noted for improvement.
Enclosure
'F808200202 9808ii PDR ADOCK 05000335
Ouring this assessment period. there was marked improvement in the identi fication of equipment deficiencies.
In two instances, significant safety equipment issues were identified by operators questioning equipment performance.
NRC equipment walkdowns indicated that safety systems were maintained in good material condition.
In contrast to the improvement in identification of equipment configuration control discovered.
during this assessment period errors in performing equipment clearances were noted.
Some equipment clearances were inadequate while others were implemented incorrectly.
Some routine use of licensed operator overtime continued from the previous assessment period.
The licensee has initiated corrective actions which should effectively address this issue, including increasing the number of licensed operators.'perators demonstrated proficient skills over a wide variety of plant operational conditions.
There were no unplanned operator induced transients.
Operators were trained properly for evolutions and conservative decision making was evident.
Teamwork within the operations staff and with other groups led to effective resolution of p'lant equipment problems.
Operators were focused on safe performance during normal operations.
whi le maneuvering the plant, and during the outages.
This included conducting fuel movement, complex testing of systems, and significant operational demands during the steam generator replacement.
Hanagement and operators focused on limiting pla'nt risk and providing substantia1 over sight and control of high risk evolutions.
Some instances were noted where management's expectations were not implemented consistently by supervisory personnel.
Late in the period, there were instances where shift management did not enforce policies on communications. shift turnovers, and control room conditions.
Similar issues were noted involving requalification training.
Initial reactor operator training was effective at qualifying operators and produced examinations meeting NRC standards.
Some aspects of the reactor operator training program were not implemented as designed, particularly the On-the-Job training program.
Upon identification, the issues surrounding the On-The-Job training program were resolved effectively.
Self-assessments and corrective actions were effective in identifying and resolving most issues.
Problem identification was effective and independent safety reviews supported Plant Operations.
Development and implementation oi corrective actions and root cause assessments were strong. and contributed to substantial improvement in overall Plant Operations.
Some corrective actions for less significant issues lacked the rigor and timely resolution afforded larger issues.
The Plant Operations area is rated Category III.
HAINTENANCE This functional area assesses activities associated with either diagnostic.
predictive, preventive, or corrective maintenance of plant structures, systems.
and components, or maintenance of the physical condition of the plant; and training of the maintenance staff.
It also includes the conduct of surveillance testings inservice inspection and testings instrument calibrations.
equipment operability testing, post-maintenance testings post-outage testing, containment leak rate testing and special testing.
Corrective maintenance controls and activities were effective and resulted in highly reliable equipment.
Coordination between operations and maintenance groups was excel')ent.
Conduct of maintenance for plant modifications such as the Steam Generator Replacement Project was performed in an excellent manner.
Implementation of'redictive and preventive maintenance programs continued to be effective in identifying potential equipment problems.
Proactive reviews contributed to the early detection of problems and improved the conduct of maintenance activities.
Testing was conducted in a thorough manner with excellent pre-briefs a
key factor in the successful performance.
Hanagement and staff attention to the simultaneous performance of maintenance and surveillance of the diesel generators to reduce periods of unavailability was a strength.
Attention to post-maintenance testing was good in most cases with only a few isolated instances of incomplete testing.
Self-assessments and audits of the maintenance program were well-planned and comprehensive.
These led to the early detection of problems and the identification of adverse trends.
Staff and management took timely corrective actions, which addressed the root causes.
Procedural adherence was strong with only isolated cases where the performance wa's not at the superior level.
In contrast to the previous assessment period, procedural adequacy was significantly improved.
Foreign material exclusion problems noted during an outage ear ly in the assessment period were corrected and practices were performed well during the remainder of the period.
Strong emphasis on material condition contributed to high safety system availabi lity.
Reliabi lity of balance-of-plant equipment was excellent with significant improvement noted since the previous assessment.
Hanagement and staff were aggressive and effectively managed the scheduling of maintenance work orders.
Some isolated equipment conditions remained challenges due to aging effects on equipment performance.
The Haintenance area is rated Category IV. ENGINEERING This functional area assesses the adequacy of technical and engineering support for plant activities.
It includes activities associated with design control; the design, installation, and testing of plant modifications; engineering and 'technical support for operations, outages.
maintenance, testing, surveillance and procurement; configuration management:
training of the, engineering staff; and support for licensing activities.
Overall. performance in the engineering area improved from its previous good level to an overall rating of superior.
Engineering provided strong support for plant operations and maintenance.
A number of very large engineering projects, most notably the Steam Generator Replacement Project, were completed.
These efforts provide an enhanced level of safety.
Equipment availability and reliability remained high.
and no plant transients attributable to Engineering occurred during the assessment period.
The licensee continued to make progress in the resolution of'ongstanding equipment problems and has effectively addressed most of the problems.
Root cause analysis and corrective action for emerging problems was generally a strength.
System and Component Engineers continued to aggressively pursue correction of 'deficiencies.
Strong support to plant operations was evident in prompt and effective resolution of emergent issues.
Even though root cause analysis and corrective action for emerging problems was considered a strength, the staff identified that the corrective actions associated with a few programmatic issues were not equally robust.
A lack of oversight contributed to fire protection program weaknesses as noted by the recent pilot fire protection functional inspection.
Also, validation of computer software for the Digital Data Processing System continued to be a challenge.
During this period, it was determined that operability evaluations were incomplete for numerous fire penetration deficiencies identified in 1995.
The licensee took prompt and thorough corrective actions to address these deficiencies.
Engineering support to maintenance was very effective.
Most notable was Engineering's support in the areas of testing, in-service inspection, and trending of motor-operated valve performance.
Good design specification documentation and strong field engineering support contributed to the excellent implementation of several important plant modifications.
Performance in the areas of design control and the maintenance of the current licensing basis were excellent.
The effort on the Total Equipment Database was particularly noteworthy.
Several longstanding deficiencies involving safety system setpoints were identified and effectively resolved by the engineering staff.
Engineering outputs were well prepared and correctly translated into plant procedures and
processes.
Safety evaluations were thorough and reflective of design margins.
These evaluations were correctly translated into operating procedures.
The licensee continues to identify discrepancies in the FSAR through their review process.
Licensing activities remained a strength.
The licensee acted aggressively in addressing repairs to a small main feedwater piping leak.
The licensee's early involvement of the NRC in addressing the condition under the guidance of Generic Letter 91-18 was noteworthy.
Quality Assurance audits and assessments and the Site Engineering self-assessments provided effective oversight of Engineering activities and identified areas for improvement and increased management attention.
Engineering completed a highly detailed selt-assessment in the areas of fire protection and post-fire, safe-shutdown and corrective actions were
'romptly initiated.
The Engineering area is rated Category 1.
PLANT SUPPORT This functional area assesses activities related to the plant support function
~ including radiological controls.
emergency preparedness, security.
chemistry, and fire protection.
It also includes activities associated with occupational radiation safety; radioactive waste management; radiological effluent control and monitoring; transportation of radioactive materials:
licensee performance during emergency preparedness exercises and actual events that test emergency plans:
emergency plan notifications; interactions with onsite and offsite
~ emergency response organizations during exercises and actual events; safeguards measures that protect plant equipment, including physical security, fitness for duty. access authorization, and contro1 of special nuclear material; housekeeping controls; and training of staff.
The radiological protection program remained effective in controlling individual radiation doses to levels well below regulatory limits.
Planned and implemented controls for access to radiation areas contributed to maintaining individual radiation doses as-low-as-reasonably-achievable.
Coordination between health physics and operations groups was excellent in addressing emergent radiation exposure issues.
Management and staff attention to the radiological effluent program.was successful in reducing and limiting released amounts to levels well below regulatory limits.
Process and effluent radiation monitor performance improved due to focused efforts to learn and address problems; problems continued with inadequate procedures for some surveillances.
Problems noted during the previous assessment period with radiological worker practices continued during this perio Chemistry parameters used as indicators for potential degradation of the primary and secondary plant water systems wer e aggressively maintained within regulatory limits.
Chemistry staff were responsive to taking actions to minimize the effects of emergent problems.
Management and staff actions resulted in improvements in the performance of the emergency preparedness training program versus the performance noted during the previous assessment period.
As a result. facilities and staff were well-prepared to respond to emergencies.
Response to actual emergencies and emergency preparedness drills and exercise challenges was timely and effective in mitigating the consequences of the problems posed by the scenarios.
The conduct of security and safeguards activities on a day-to-day basis was good, with prompt compensatory measures and attention to tasks.
Security equipment continued to be well-maintained because of attention to testing and timely correction of identified problems.
Problems noted with the Fitness-For-Outy Program during the previous assessment period were corrected; as a result, the performance in this area included highly qualified staff'nd good controls to detect and resolve problems.
Access control of personnel during terminations continued to be a
challenge, but was improving in corrective actions to prevent recurrence.
The fire protection program continued to have some deficiencies in the conduct of equipment surveillance and evaluation of protection system adequacy.
In general.
the surveillance program identified inadequacies.
There were proactive efforts to identify problems with detection and protection systems.
Training and performance of the fire brigade were good with prompt actions in response to actual events.
Plant housekeeping remained good. with a small number of isolated areas where attention was not at a superior level of performance.
Individual workers were noted to maintain worksites clean and free of debris.
Self-assessments were effective in focusing staff and management attention on what areas or problems needed to be addressed.
Corrective actions were timely and resolved the problem in most areas, with the exception of fire protection.
The Plant Support area is rated Category 2.