IR 05000348/1996099

Summarizes 970122 Meeting W/Util to Discuss SALP Repts 50-348/96-99 & 50-364/96-99

ML20134G246
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	01/30/1997
From:	Jerrica Johnson NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Dennis Morey SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING CO.
References
NUDOCS 9702100335
Download: ML20134G246 (23)

Text

.

.

January 30, 1997 Southern Nuclear Operating Company. In ATTN: Mr. D. N. Morey Vice President P. O. Box 1295 Birmingham AL 35201 SUBJECT: MEETING SUMMARY - SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANC FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT. REPORT NOS. 50-348/96-99 AND 50-364/96-99 Gentlemen:

This refers to the January 22, 1997 meeting held to discuss the NRC's Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) for your Farley facilit Our report. 50-348/96-99 and 50-364/96-99. dated January 9. 1997, had been previously sent to you. I have enclosed a summary of our presentation at the meeting, a list of attendees, and a copy of the SALP slides that were used at the presentatio In accordance with Section 2.790(a) of the NRC's " Rules of Practice." Part Title 10. Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosures will be placed in the NRC Public Document Roo No reply to this letter is required. However, if you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact u :

Sincerel !

l (Original signed by Jon R. Johnson) ]

l Jon R. Johnson Director l Division of Reactor Projects Docket Nos: 50-348, 50-364 License Nos: NPF-2 NPF-8 Enclosures-1. Meeting Attendees 2. SALP Slides 3. SALP Briefing Package cc w/encls: (See Page 2)

9702100335 970130 PDR ADOcK 05000348 G PDR ( \

ctfu

. - _ . . _ . . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ - _ _ . _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ ___.__ . . _ . _ . _ _

,

.

i i

. SNC 2  ;

i cc w/encls: l i M. J. Ajluni i Licensing Manager  :

'

, Southern Nuclear Operating

Company. In ;

1 P. O. Box 1295  ;

Birmingham. AL 35201-1295

~

i

-

!

R. D. Hill. J General Manager. Farley Plant ,

-

Southern Nuclear Operating  ;

Company. In ;

A$ hor A 36312 G. S. Waymire. Su)ervisor '

Safety Audit and Engineering Review 4 Farley Nuclear Plant ,

i P. D. Box 470  :

~

) Ashford. AL 36312

! J. D. Woodard 4 Executive Vice President i Southern Nuclear Operating Com

.

P. O.pany..In Box 1295 -;

{ Birmingham, AL 35201

.

! State Health Officer .

Alabama Dept. of Public Health i 434 Monroe Street '

.

'

Montgomery. AL 36130-1701

! M, Stanford Blanton <

Balch and Bingham Law Firm

! P. O. Box 306

1710 Sixth Avenue North

! Birmingham. AL 35201

s Chairman -

! Houston County Commission

P. O. Box 6406 i i Dothan. AL 36302  ;

i Distribution w/encls:

J. Zimmerman. NRR i P. H. Skinner, RII

R. P. Carrion. RII 1 ,

i Distribution w/encls cont'd: (See Page 3)  !

$  !

,

-

i

-

_; . _ . . --_ ___ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ . . . _ _ _ . _ . _ - _ _ . - _ __ . . _ . _ _ _ _

.

,

'

i I

l SNC 3 Distribution w/encls: Continued PUBLIC NRC Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

7388 N State Hwy 95

!

Columbia AL 36319 .

I I

.

\

crFicr pff DRo p! NO pri.nop SIGNATURE h ,T NAME RPCarrior.:dka PH 11ner JRJohnson DATE 01 / 7 7 / 97 Chl \/97 01 / / 97 01 / / 97 01 / / 97 01 / / 97 COPY? [Y[S) NO [rES l NO VES NO VES NO VES NO VES NO OtilCIAL' RECORD COPY NI NAt A:\F5ALFbOM.LiR

- -

. . - - _ .

- _ _ _ -._ __._ - _..- ___ _ _ _ .-..-._ -- - _.- - - -

_3 .

-

i*

I i

LIST OF ATTENDEES

j NRC Attendees:

s L. Reyes, Regional Administrator. Region II (RII).

. J. Johnson. Director. Division of Reactor Projects (DRP). RII J. Zimmerman. Licensing Project Manager. NRR

! P. Skinner Chief. Reactor Projects Branch 2

T. Ross Senior Resident Inspector. Farley Nuclear Station ,

, R. Hannah, Public Affairs Officer. RII

R. Trojanowski. State Liaison Officer. RII Licensee Attendees:

i Southern Nuclear Ooeratino Comoany:

. W. Hairston. President and Chief Operating Officer i J. Woodard. Executive Vice President

!

'

D. Morey. Vice President L Stinson. Assistant General Manager Plant Operations J. McGowan, Manager. Safety Audit and Engineering Review Numerous Farley personnel.

j Public Attendees:

,

S. Guerra. Alabama Emergency Management Agency j G. Morrison Alabama Emergency Management Agency j M. Cash. Alabama Radiation Control

T. Taylor-Beck. Alabama Radiation Control

S. Womack. Houston County Alabama Emergency Management Agency j B. Dunning. Houston County Alabama Emergency Management Agency

G. McConnell, Georgia Emergency Management Agency j S. Schildecker. Georgia Emergency Management Agency

!

P. Cochran. Georgia Emergency Management Agency i

G. Gregory. Georgia Emergency Management Agency l J. Hardemann. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, i Emergency Preparedness Division i A. Crumbley. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, i Emergency Preparedness Division

! B. Simonton Georgia Department of Natural Resource i Emergency Preparedness Division i B. Slocomb. Georgia Department of Natural Resources.

Emergency Preparedness Division

.

.

i

I a

j Enclosure 1

. _- - .-

. . . _ - _ - - - - - . _ - - - . -

.

l-

!

I

!

! UNITED STATES i NUCLEAR REGULATORY

-

,

COMMISSION  !

l 1 i

& U

t ,*s l

!

9 o

'

i

@*4***

! FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT

! CYCLE 13

M ARCH 26,1995 TO NOVEMBER 23,1996

!

s SALP

i BRIEFING PACKAGE l

PR ESENTATION JANUARY 22,1997

] Enclosure 2

. . _ . . . _ __. . . _ . _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . . . _ _ . ~ - - _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ . . _ . _ _ . . - _ - _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ . - _ _ . , _ - _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ . . . _ . _ _

.

.

i SALP PROCESS ,

'

i Resident

-> Inspector Program

Region i

_p Based Inspections s

.

SALP REGIONAL L.icensing SALP ADMINISTRATOR BOARD I>

'

-

Special Initiatives Event Reviews Master Inspection Plan Enclosure 2

- . . . - - - - - . - - . - . _ - -

.

,

-

!

'

! -

'

! UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY i COMMISSION

i

'

,

& 4, 4

!

e $

A

!

i g n M -

o o

i

\ 4***

N  :

'

l 1

' FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT t

CYCLE 13 l M ARCH 26,1995 TO NOVEMBER 23,1996

, .

SALP l

!

BRIEFING PACKAGE

'

l

'

] PR ESENTATION

JANUARY 22,1997 Enclosure 3

.

_ __ - . . . - _ . . . _ - - - - . - - . .. _ . - .- . . _ . . .

...

.

SALP PROCESS

.

Resident

-> Inspector  ;

Program Region

_p Based

,

inspections

.

.

[

/ SALP REGIONAL Licensing /

ADMINISTRATOR > SALP '

BOARD

'

t

Special Initiatives  !

,

,

!

Event i Reviews Master Inspection Plan enc 1==e 3

!

. _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

.

.

PERFORMANCE CATEGORY RATINGS i

CATEGORY LICENSEE ATTENTION AND INVOLVEMENT HAVE BEEN :

PROPERLY FOCUSED ON SAFETY AND RESULTED IN A '

SUPERIOR LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE. LICENSEE PROGRAMS AND PROCEDURES HAVE PROVIDED EFFECTIVE l CONTROLS. THE LICENSEE'S SELF-ASSESSMENT EFFORTS HAVE BEEN EFFECTIVE IN THE IDENTIFICATION OF EMERGENTISSUES. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ARE TECHNICALLY SOUND, COMPREHENSIVE, AND THOROUG RECURRING PROBLEMS ARE ELIMINATED, AND RESOLUTION OF ISSUES IS TIMELY. ROOT CAUSE ANALYSES ARE THOROUG CATEGORY LICENSEE ATTENTION AND INVOLVEMENT ARE NORMALLY WELL FOCUSED AND RESULTED IN A GOOD LEVEL OF SAFETY PERFORMANCE. LICENSEE PROGRAMS

'

AND PROCEDURES NORMALLY PROVIDE THE NECESSARY CONTROL OF ACTIVITIES, BUT DEFICIENCIES MAY EXIS THE LICENSEE'S SELF-ASSESSMENTS ARE NORMALLY GOOD, ALTHOUGH ISSUES MAY ESCAPE IDENTIFICATIO CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ARE USUALLY EFFECTIVE, ALTHOUGH SOME MAY NOT BE COMPLETE. ROOT CAUSE ANALYSES ARE NORMALLY THOROUG CATEGORY LICENSEE ATTENTION AND INVOLVEMENT HAVE RESULTED IN AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF SAFETY !

PERFORMANCE. HOWEVER, LICENSEE PERFORMANCE MAY EXH.IBIT ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING !

'

CHARACTERISTICS. LICENSEE PROGRAMS AND PROCEDURES HAVE NOT PROVIDED SUFFICIENT CONTROL OF ACTIVITIES IN IMPORTANT AREAS. THE LICENSEE'S SELF-ASSESSMENT EFFORTS MAY NOT OCCUR UNTIL AFTER A POTENTIAL PROBLEM BECOMES APPARENT. A -

CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE SAFETY IMPLICATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT ISSUES MAY NOT HAVE BEEN DEMONSTRATED. NUMEROUS MINORISSUES COMBINE TO INDICATE THAT THE LICENSEE'S CORRECTIVE ACTION IS NOT THOROUGH. ROOT CAUSE ANALYSES DO NOT PROBE ~

DEEP ENOUGH, RESULTING IN THE INCOMPLETE RESOLUTION OF ISSUES. BECAUSE THE MARGIN TO UNACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE IN IMPORTANT ASPECTS '

IS SMALL, INCREASED NRC AND LICENSEE ATTENTION IS REQUIRE Enclosure 3 .

- - . - . - . . - _ _ - _ .

. . - - - - _ - . - -- - . - --

.

.

.

3LANT 03ERATIONS

, CA~EGORY :.

't l STRENGTHS:

! * STABLE PLANT OPERATIONS IN RECENT PERIOD

'

, o EXCELLENT LICENSE 0 OPERATOR PERFORMANCE

,

t l e ROUTINE SHIFT CREW ORGANIZATION AND TEAMWORK l

e MANAGEMENT INVOLVEMENT IN PLANT OPERATIONS

<

e CONTROL ROOM PROFESSIONALISM l

i

i j . CHALLENGES:

i j e PERSONNEL ERRORS RELATED TO SYSTEM OPERATION AND CONFIGURATION CONTROL l

$ *

.,

!

4

Enclosure 3

- . . - _

- - _ _ _ .

.

-

.

.

.

I MAINTENANCE CA~~EGORY 2 STRENGTHS:

• MANAGEMENT SUPPORT AND INVOLVEMENT

,

• SEVERAL SUCCESSFUL OUTAGES

!

• EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF ISI AND IST PROGRAMS

• STEAM GENERATOR MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION PROGRAM i

CHALLENGES:

{

i

• EQUIPMENT PROBLEMS CAUSING PLANT TRANSIENTS d

• PERSONNEL ERRORS

• EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR AVAILABILITY

.

Enclosure 3

.. -

_ - . .. .

.

.

_

.

,

! ENGINEERING

CA~~EGORY :. ,

'

STRENGTHS:

e SUPPORT TO OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE i

-

e ROOT CAUSE ANALYSES

,

e MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT AND INVOLVEMENT e - QUALITY OF LICENSING SUBMITTALS

,

CHALLENGES:

• IMPROVE VENDOR OVERSIGHT i

e ENHANCE CONTROL OF AS BUILT CONFIGURATION

.

,

l

)

l l

l Enclosure 3

-. .- .. .. -- .--_- -. _ -. . - -. . . - .

.

.

4 i

3LAN-~ SUPPORT CA~~EGORY 2

STRENGTHS

i

'

e RADIOLOGICAL DOSE CONTROL PROGRAM

, e EFFLUENT CONTROLS AND ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING e

i e SECURITY PROGRAM I

}

s I

CHALLENGES:

e RADIOLOGICAL PROCEDURAL AND EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES f

j e PHYSICAL SEARCHES OF MATERIAL ENTERING PROTECTED AREA

!

e FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT i

i e PLANT HOUSEKEEPING

.

O

,

i

!

,

I

, Enclosure 3

. _ . _ . . _ . -- . _

.- . . . - . . - , _ _ . - - - . - . .

J

-

l

!

! ARLEY NUC _ EAR 3 AN~~

_

SA_P RATING SUMMARY

,

FUNCTIONAL RATING RATING i AREA THIS PERIOD LAST PERIOD l PLANT OPERATIONS 1 1

.

MAINTENANCE 2 2

ENGINEERING 1 1 i;

i PLANT SUPPORT 2 1

i

!

Enclosure 3

._

.

-

January 9, 1997 Southern Nuclear Operating Company. In ATTN: Mr. D. N. Morey Vice President P. O. Box 1295 Birmingham. AL 35201 SUBJECT: SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE','FARLEY/ NUCLEAR PLANT, REPORT NOS. 50-348/96-99 AND 50-364/96-99 Gentlemen:

The NRC Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) has been com)leted for your Farley facility. The facility was evaluated for the period of March 26, 1995, through November 23, 1996. The results of the evaluation are documented in the enclosed SALP report. This report will be discussed with you at a public meeting to be held at the Farley site on January 22, 1997, at 10:30 a.m. (CST).

Farley Nuclear Plant (FNP) performance was assessed in four functional areas:

Plant Operations. Maintenance, Engineering, and Plant Support. Performance in Operations and Engineering remained superior. Performance in Maintenance remained good. Performance in the Plant Support functional area declined but was still considered good overal Plant Operations' superior performance was characterized by conservative plant management decisions, and strong operator knowledge and ability, as demonstrated by effective response to plant transients and proper implementation of startups and shutdowns. Safety Audit and Engineering Review group audits were thorough, critical, and contained findings which improved the safe operation of the plan Maintenance activities were well planned and controlled: surveillance and in-service inspection and testing programs continued to be effectively implemented. Adverse Balance of Plant (B0P) ecuipment performance, personnel errors due to a lack of attention to detail anc emergency diesel generator availability were areas that remained a challeng .

.

The Engineering functional area continued to be characterized by superior performance. Previously identified strengths of strong management involvement and oversight, a well qualified staff at both the site and corporate office, and performance initiatives have been maintaine Licensing submittals were of high quality. The quality and effectiveness of major modifications, as well as licensee root cause analyses, continued to improve. B0P reliability problems and improved quality assurance and oversight of vendor activities remained a challenge in the engineering are Plant Support did not sustain past superior performance, but the area was still assessed as good. Overall performance for security activities remained very strong, but radiological control activities exhibited a decline. The Enclosure 3

\_

_ , _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ . . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . . _ . _ . _ . _ _ . _ . . _ _ , _ . _ _ . . _

-

. .

i

! SNC. IN ;

emergency preparedness program was effective in maintaining site readiness.

!

Fire protection activities. represented the most significant performance

decline.

)

. .

,

In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice." a. copy of '

a this letter and its enclosure will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.

Should you have any questions or comments. I would be pleased to discuss them

,

with you.

i

Sincerely, i

(Original signed by E.w. Merschoff-g for Luis A. Reyes)

.

-

Luis A. Reyes j Regional Administrator

I Enclosure: Systematic Assessment of Licensee

. . Performance Report

!

l- Docket Nos.: 50-348 and 50-364

License Nos.

NPF-2 and NPF-8

'

cc w/ encl:

M. J. Ajluni j Licensing Manager-  !

! Southern Nuclear Operating j Company. Inc.

' P. O. Box 1295 Birmingham AL 35201-1295 i R. D. Hill J General Manager. Farley Plant j- Southern Nuclear Operating Company. Inc.

P. O. Box 470 l j Ashford. AL 36312

. .

.

G. S. Waymire. Supervisor Safety Audit and Engineering Review Farley Nuclear Plant i P. O. Box 470 i Ashford. AL 36312

;

i

cc w/ encl cont'd

(See Page 3)

!

.

.

.I Enclosure 3 i

, , , , ., ..,. . -,

.. .,. _ ._ _ _ . . _ . . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . . . _ . _ _ _ _ . . . .

l.-

'

'

'

.

]

.

l

'!

SNC. IN i

-

cc w/ encl: Continued l

'

State Health Officer

) Alabama Dept. of Public Health l- 434 Monroe Street j Montgomery. AL 36130-1701

M. Stanford Blanton

, Balch and Bingham Law Firm P. O. Box 306

.

!

{

i 1710 Sixth Avenue North '

i Birmingham AL 35201

i Chairman 4 Houston County Commission

!

,

Dbtan AL 302

.

INPO i 700 Galleria Parkway -

l Atlanta GA 30339-5957 i

bcc w/ encl:  !

Chairman Shirley A. Jackson

Commissioner Kenneth Rogers I Commissioner Greta Dicus l Commissioner Nils Diaz 1 Commissioner Edward McGaffigan, J H.L. Thompson. Jr.. EDO G. M. Tracy. Regional Coordinator. E00 R. P. Zimmerman. NRR J. Lieberman. OE ,

'

S. A. Varga. NRR J. A. Zwolinski, NRR D. L. Gamberoni. Jr., NRR/ILPB (2 copies)

H. J. Miller. RI A. B. Beach, RIII J. E. Dyer. RIV K. E. Perkins. WCF0 E. W. Herschoff. RII J..P. Jaudon. RII -

.

K. P. Barr, RII C. A. Casto. RII T. A. Peebles. RII P. E. Fredrickson. RII ,

K. M. Clark. RII i R. E. Trojanowski RII bec w/enci cont'd: (See Page 4)

Enclosure 3

,

. . -. .- - --- - ~. . -- . .- .-- - '

l

,

i SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE REPORT FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT 50-348/96-99 AND 50-364/96-99 Background The SALP Board convened on December 18, 1996, to assess the nuclear I safety performance of Farley Nuclear Plant for the period March 26, 1995, through November 23, 1996. The Board was conducted in accordance with Management Directive 8.6, " Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance." Board members were J. R. Johnson (Board Chairperson)

Director Division of Reactor Projects: A. F. Gibson, (former) Director, Division of Reactor Safety; and H. N. Berkow, Director. Project Directorate II-2, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. This assessment was reviewed and approved by the Regional Administrato II. Plant Operations This functional area addresses the control and execution of activities directly related to operating the plant. It includes activities such as l plant startup plant shutdown, and response to transients. It also l includes initial and requalification training programs for licensed l operator Overall performance in the Plant Operations area remained superior. The

early portion of the assessment period was challenged by a significant number of plant transients: automatic and manual trips along with several power reductions and forced outages. These were primarily caused by secondary plant chemistry as well as main feedwater and main turbine control system equipment problems, and not by operator errors. The

latter part of the period was characterized by much more stable plant l operations with no automatic trips in 199 Performance by licensed operators was generally excellent. Their knowledge and performance during plant maneuvers was superior throughout the period. Particularly noteworthy was the proper implementation of plant operating procedures for routine startups and shutdowns. Defueling

! and refueling activities on both units were well controlled. Excellent implementation of abnormal and emergency operating 3rocedures was observed during multiple transients due to electro-lydraulic control (EHC) system and feedwater pump problems, as well as responses to significant secondary system steam leaks. This performance was indicative of experienced and well trained licensed operators. The licensed operator requalification training was considered good; however, documentation of the conduct of remedial training was weak on occasio Routine plant shifts were well staffed with experienced operator Stable and consistent crews were maintained for a year period. In addition, during the latest refueling outage, the entire shift crew remained together, strengthening teamwork for the outage. Operator overtime was well controlled. Staffing of the technical su) port center I with Operations supervisors to assure proper tagging and scleduling of Enclosure 3

- .-_ . . .

, ___ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ . _ _ _

.

l

2 i

maintenance demonstrated an excellent safety focus. Improved performance was noted with wrong unit, wrong train component operation.

Certain personnel errors related to system configuration control remained

a challenge, especially in the latter part of the period. Configuration

control Jas also a challenge during the last SALP period. Several l

'

personnel errors by non-licensed system operators resulted in operability I challenges to emergency diesel generators and transients in the letdown and volume control tank portions of the reactor coolant system.

1 Operations management was closely involved in the review of plant

!

incidents and occurrence reports. Senior reactor operator (SRO)

experience in site managerial positions remained a strength throughout the Farley organization. This included not only SR0 qualification but also significant on-shift operating experience. Management participation during requalification exams improved late in the period. Control room professionalism, awareness demonstrated by operators at the controls, and i

a minimum of lit annunciators or control room deficiencies indicated 3 strong management support for plant operations. Management decisions-to shut down Unit 1 for a short mid-cycle outage prior to the olympic games.

and a decision to shut down Unit 2 3rior to the arrival of hurricane Opal were considered conservative, and t1e evolutions were conducted without

incident.

i i Operations self-assessments and safety committee reviews were generally j acceptable. Root cause trending of human performance problems has improved. Management typically supported sending shift crews to other facilities to benchmark good practice During the last month of this assessment period, plant management initiated a manager's tour program to improve in-plant observations and self-assessments. The site audit program conducted by the Safety Audit and Engineering Review group was thorough and self-critical, and included extensive SRO expertise as well as other specialists when require The Plant Operations area is rated Category III. MAINTENANCE This functional area addresses activities associated with diagnostic, predictive, preventive, and corrective maintenance of plant structures, systems and components; maintenance of the physical condition of the plant; and training of the maintenance staff. It also includes surveillance testing, in-service inspection and testing. instrument calibration, operability testing, post-maintenance testing, post-outage testing, containment leak rate testing. and special testin Management support and involvement were evident in the planning and conduct of plant maintenance activities. This involvement was demonstrated by the successful completion of three outages and many major maintenance evolutions. The pre-planning and control of work packages Enclosure 3

. .. _ _ _ _ _ . __ _

. .

..

,

l 1'

>

'

i j 3

i were considered good. Good support to Operations reduced the number of

operator work arounds and corrective maintenance backlogs.

i

'

The surveillance, in-service inspection and in-service testing programs

-

continued to be effectively implemented. The predictive maintenance

- program was also effective. Safety-related equipment performance was i good; however, Balance of Plant (BOP) equipment problems continued to

'

adversely affect the overall performance of the plant, as evidenced by i numerous power reductions, transients, and trips. The majority of these

{ power reductions and trips were caused by main turbine and main feedwater i pum) EHC problems and steam generator (SG) chemistry control (sodium)

pro)lems during the first half of the period.

The SG maintenance and inspection program was a strength. Management was

effective in monitoring and maintaining the integrity of the SGs.

j l

! -The corrective actions and root cause analyses of maintenance issues

continued to be generally effective. The corrective actions addressed immediate needs and the long-term actions were appropriately based on root cause evaluations. This was demonstrated by the resolution of the

. electro-hydraulic control system problems.

f Personnel errors, mostly due to a lack of attention to detail, adversely I

. affected some maintenance activities. Procedural issues contributed to i

several maintenance and test deficiencies. Additionally, emergency :

diesel generator availability was adversely. impacted by several problems ,

! associated with fuel oil leaks, service water leaks, and surveillance !

j test failure ,

} The Maintenance area is rated Category 2.

!

j IV. ENGINEERING 1 This- functional area addresses engineering and technical support activities. It includes support to operations and maintenance, management support for process improvement initiatives, modifications, root cause analysis, corrective actions, as well as licensing activitie Engineering performance continued at a superior level during this perio !

Previously identified strengths were maintained, and the licensee j aggressively addressed challenges to safety and operatio Engineering support to Operations and Maintenance was effective. This i' was evident in major maintenance and modification activities, aggressive and innovative SG maintenance and repair activities, and actions related

• to BOP equipment. The quality and effectiveness of major modifications demonstrated further improvement over the previous perio Several instances of breakdowns in communication, oversight, and quality

] assurance between Farley personnel and vendors were observed with regard

) Enclosure 3

! ,

.- - . .- -

. - . - . . . .-- - .

'

.

l

I i

4 i

.

to understanding current plant design configuration and technical i support. Continued attention to vendor control is considered a challenge l to assure continued succes Engineering root cause analyses and follow-up corrective actions were com3rehensive and effective, especially during the latter part of the SAL) period. Engineering was a major contributor to resolution of the SG sodium contamination and the EHC/ Digital EHC system problems which caused numerous power reductions while returning from the Unit 2 refueling ;

outage in April 199 l With the exception of vendor oversight, effective management oversight at the site and in the corporate office continued during this SALP perio Farley management has conducted several performance improvement initiatives including: the Safety System Self-Assessment Program to identify and correct design and operational deficiencies in critical safety systems: the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report Verification Program to assure conformance with the license: and the Single Point Vulnerability Study to identify major contributors to trips, power reductions and shutdown Several process improvements have also been implemented, including the Engineering Projects Council and Configuration Control Boar While modification control was generally good, there were several !

instances of inadequate control of the as-built configuration, both pre- i existing and recent, involving welds, pipe supports, bolt torque values and other systems and components that collectively indicate the need for >

additional management focu Licensing submittals were generally of high quality: however, some significant licensing action requests were not submitted in a timely manner to fully support the requested review schedul The Engineering area is rated Category 1 V. PLANT SUPPORT This functional area assesses activities related to the plant support function, including radiological controls, radioactive effluents and waste, plant chemistry. emergency preparedness, security, fire protection and housekeepin The radiological control program provided good 3rotection of the health and safety of facility workers and members of t1e public. The program was effective in limiting the internal and external radiation exposures of workers to levels well below established regulatory limits. The ALARA program was satisfactor Extensive steam generator work contributed significantly to occupational radiation exposure but administrative controls and other dose reduction initiatives were effective in reducing dose. The effluent control program limited exposures to members of the Enclosure 3

,

.. - _ __ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _

.

public by maintaining radionuclide effluent releases, and the resultant radiation doses from those releases, at a small percentage of regulatory limits. The environmental monitoring program confirmed the effectiveness of the effluent release program. The chemistry program maintained good arimary coolant quality. Radioactive waste storage on site was minima Resolution of procedural and equipment inadequacies and reduction of the frequency of procedural non-compliances, noted toward the end of the assessment period, are challenges to the radiological control progra The emergency preparedness program was effective in maintaining site readiness to respond to emergencies: however, weaknesses associated with the tone alert radio system were corrected late in the perio Emergency I preparedness training and drills were appropriat The licensee continued to have a strong, well-managed security progra Equipment was reliable and consistently met the requirements of the Physical Security Plan. Security management was generally proactive in recognizing potential weaknesses. Plant operations continued to have good communications with the security force, Training and qualification of the security force was a strength. . Continued vigilance regarding thorough searches of items entering the protected area was a challeng Performance in implementation of the fire protection program declined during this SALP period. Organization and administration of the fire protection program was good. Fire protection and prevention procedures, including procedures for the control of ignition sources, transient combustibles and housekeeping, were adequat Implementation of procedures was satisfactory except for specific instances of inadequate control of the fire watch program. The fire brigade training program and performance of the fire brigade during drills and actual fires were goo Quality assurance audits of the fire protection program were generally thorough and corrective action for identified major problems was timely; however, these audits did not detect poor inspection programs for fire barrier Maintenance and Jerformance of the fire protection systems and equipment were margina iultiple failures of the diesel driven fire pumps occurred during the first part of the SALP cycle. Performance improved toward the end of the Jeriod due to enhanced preventive maintenance and

-

accelerated testing. iultiple failures of the automatic sprinkler systems occurred in early 1996. Enhanced 3reventive maintenance and accelerated testing were im)lemented but, )y the end of the SALP period, the root cause of the sprinder system problem had not been identifie Maintenance and inspection of Kaowool raceway fire barriers were inadequate, resulting in fire barriers that failed to meet the required design configuration. The facility fire protection program, as it relates to equipment and fire barriers, warrants increased management attentio Enclosure 3

.

.

l

Plant housekeeping for both units degraded significantly during Unit 1 Refueling Outage 13 and cleanup actions were very slow following com)letion of the refueling outage. Housekeeping practices associated wit 1 the material condition and maintenance of the radiation monitoring systems were not fully effective. Station management has recently initiated a management tour program, in part, to improve observation of housekeeping and material conditio The Plant Support area is rated Category l l

l l

l Enclosure 3 I