IR 05000397/1994004
| ML17290B053 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 03/11/1994 |
| From: | Johnson P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17290B051 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-397-94-04, 50-397-94-4, NUDOCS 9403310074 | |
| Download: ML17290B053 (65) | |
Text
Inspection Report:
Operating License:
Licensee:
Facility Name:
Inspection At:
Inspection Conducted:
Inspectors:
APPENDIX B U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
50-397/94-04 NPF-21 Washington Public Power Supply System P. 0.
Box 968 Richland, WA 99352 Washington Nuclear Project No.
(WNP-2)
WNP-2 site near Richland, Washington January
February 21, 1994 R.
C. Barr, Senior Resident Inspector D. L. Proulx, Resident Inspector S.
P. Sinchez, Resident NRR Intern D.
E. Corporandy, Project Inspector (1/31-2/4/94)
D. F. Kirsch, Technical Assistant (2/14-2/18/94)
Approved by:
Ins ection Summar
P.
H. J hnson, Chief Reac o
Projects Branch
B If y Date Signed Areas Ins ected:
Routine, announced inspection by resident and region-based inspectors of control room operations, licensee action on previous inspection findings, operational safety verification, surveillance program, maintenance program, licensee event reports, special inspection topics, and procedural adherence.
During this inspe'ction, Inspection Procedures 61726, 62702, 62703, 71707, 92700, 92701, 92702 and 93702 were used.
Results:
~Stren ths:
The Technical Specifications Surveillance Improvement Program (TSSIP)
continued to identify meaningful discrepancies in the surveillance program (Paragraphs 2.3 and 4.2).
The licensee employed sound engineering methodology in developing an empirical method of determining the combined leak rate past RHR-V-9 and 209 (Paragraph 2.3).
The licensee reduced power and repaired numerous steam leaks on January 14, 1994 (Paragraph 1).
9403310074 940318 PDR ADOCK 05000397
After determining that containment leakage had increased, the licensee performed a good investigation to pinpoint the leak location (Paragraph 2.4).
Weaknesses:
The annunciator response procedure (ARP) for high pressure in the shutdown cooling suction line was inadequate, in that it did not direct operators on how to respond to the annunciator in Hode 1 (Paragraph 2.1).
~
8ecause of the inadequate direction in the ARP, initial operator response to the high pressure condition was weak, in that operators took action without verifying the parameters of concern (e.g.,
they did not determine the leakrates of the boundary valves)
(Paragraph 2. 1).
~
The licensee's initial response to high pressure in the shutdown cooling line was weak, in that relief valve RHR-V-5 was allowed to continuously cycle to reduce the high pressure condition (Paragraph 2.1).
~
The licensee was not timely in determining the combined leak rate past RHR-V-9/209 (Paragraph 2. 1).
~
The inspection identified several weaknesses involving operator turn-overs, control board walkdowns, and intrusiveness.
Operators were slow in identifying apparently excessive containment boundary leakage (Paragraph 2.4)
and a mispositioned valve on the main control board (Paragraph 3.2.4); operator logkeeping was weak (Paragraph 3.2. 1);
and operators were unaware of out-of-specification indication on the backup transformer voltage (Paragraph 3.2.4), indication of increasing unidentified leakage into the drywell (Paragraph 3.2.4),
and the status or accuracy of a control room deficiency (Paragraph 3.2.4).
~
The inspectors noted several examples in which the control of work appeared to be weak.
These included the removal and inadequate reinstallation of instrument tubing by painters (Paragraph 2.4), the failure of chemistry personnel to notify the control room prior to operating the post accident sampling system (Paragraph 3.2.4),
the performance of work which unknowingly rendered average power range monitor (APRH) A inoperable (Paragraph 5. 1),
and weak control of combustible materials in vital areas (Paragraph 5.2).
~
Emergency core cooling system (ECCS)
room coolers appeared to be degrading (Paragraph 3.3).
Summar of Ins ection Findin s:
.
Violations 397/94-04-01 and 397/94-04-05 were opened (Paragraphs 2.1 and 5.1).
Inspection Followup Item 397/94-04-02 was opened (Paragraph 2.2).
Violation 397/94-04-03 was identified and closed (Paragraph 2.3).
Non-cited violation 397/94-04-04 was noted (Paragraph 4.2).
l 1,
~
Violations 397/93-20-01, 397/93-18-04, 397/92-25-01, 397/92-36-02, 397/93-31-02, 397/93-31-07, and 397/93-36-01 were closed (Paragraph 7).
~
Inspection Followup Items 397/94-08-01 and 397/91-24-02 were examined but not closed (Paragraphs 8.1 and 8.4).
~
Inspection Followup Items 397/93-06-04 and 397/93-201-01 were closed (Paragraphs 8.2 and 8.3).
~
Licensee Event Reports 397/92-20, 397/92-35 (Revisions O,and 1),
397/93-11 (Revisions 0 and 1),
and 397/93-13 (Revisions 0 and 1) were closed (Paragraph 9).
Attachments:
~
Attachment 1 - Persons Contacted and Exit Meeting
~
Attachment 2 - February 4, 1994 Hanagement Heeting in Region V Office
~
Attachment 3 - Materials Provided by the Licensee During the February 4, 1994 Management Meeting
DETAILS
PLANT STATUS At the start of the inspection period, the plant was operating at 100 percent power.
Due to problems with rod position indication, the licensee decreased power.to 80 percent on January ll and 12 to perform a rod set and returned to full power.
On January 14, 1994, the licensee decreased power to 50 percent in an attempt to seal a leak in the main condenser and to repair other leaks in the steam plant.
Due to excessive boundary valve leakage, the attempt to repair the condenser tube leak was unsu
REGION V OFFICE On February 4, 1994, members of Supply System management met with Region V
managers in the Region V Office.
The following persons were in attendance:
Su
S stem J.
C. Gearhart, Director, guality Assurance G. 0. Smith, Operations Division Manager NRC Re ion V
S. A.
P.
H.
F.
R.
D. F.
Richards, Acting Director, Division of Reactor Safety and Projects Johnson, Chief, Reactor Projects Branch
Huey, Enforcement Officer Kirsch, Technical Assistant Mr. Richards opened the meeting at 9:30 a.m.
by welcoming Messrs.
Smith and Gearhart, noting that the meeting was scheduled pursuant to the Supply System Managing Director's desire that members of his staff meet periodically with members of NRC management.
Messrs.
Smith and Gearhart stated that they appreciated the opportunity to discuss issues of current interest, and proceeded to discuss the topics outlined in Attachment 3, which was provided to the NRC attendees.
Mr. Gearhart noted during his presentation on guality Assurance issues that responsibility for Direct Line, the licensee's employee concerns program (ECP),
was being assigned to his directorate.
He stated that this is being done to provide enhanced management response to employee concerns, which will incl'ude followup contact with the employee to confirm that the initial concern was appropriately addressed.
He noted that the Supply System would be providing a letter by February ll, 1994, to outline improvements to the ECP.
Mr. Huey noted that the ECP is actually a "safety net,"
and that line management should have the principal responsibility to ensure 'that employee concerns are properly addressed at an early stage.
Mr. Gearhart agreed, and stated that this is being aggressively addressed with licensee managers.
He also noted that the problem evaluation request (PER) process is being changed to require that a copy of all non-accepted PERs, with the reason for non-acceptance, be retained on record.
Mr. Richards thanked the licensee participants for coming to the meeting, and closed by noting that their action plans looked good for the items of interest which had been discussed.
He stated that the NRC will continue to monitor the results of their ongoing initiatives and action ATTACHMENT3 MATERIALSPROVIDED BY THE LICENSEE TO NRC ATTENDEES AT THE FEBRUARY 4, 1994, MANAGEMENTMEETING (See Attachment 2 of this Report)
Washington Public Power Supply System February 2994 Operations Division Focus WNP-2 Improvements Quality Assurance Directorate 93QSl8
OPERATIONS DIVISION FOCUS Accountabiiity must be pushed further down into the organization Manager/Supervisory Training Allexempt Operations Department personnel are presently attending Manager/Supervisor skills training. These courses include "Interactive Management" and "Managing Performance" modules. Training willbe completed prior to the R-9 Refueling Outage.
Changes in the way we do Business in the Control Room
@le have successfully moved responsibility downward in the Control Room placing the Shift Manager in more of a management oversight role.
The Shift Manager:
Attends the daily Maintenance Managers/Supervisor meeting.
Provides plant status at the morning meeting.-
Frequently attends POC and management decision making meetings.
Provides oversight of critical "field" activities.
Improves communications between support groups.
The Control Room Supervisor:
Reviews and approves all work activities which were previously approved by the Shift Manager.
The "Lead" Control Room Operator position has been developed to perform many of the responsibilities previously handled by the CRS.
The changes i~>ere implementecl in Noveniber 2993.
Supervisory Oversight of Performance
~
An Operations Instruction has been developed and implemented to document Operations management expectations for appropriate in-field observation and coaching of department personnel. Each department 930818 AllKllfCTONtUlllCtOwl ~
4S SUPPLY SYSTEM
manager/supervisor is required to perform frequent observations of tours, procedure implementation, and testing activities on a routine basis. Documented feedback willbe provided. The intended result will be a decrease in the number of Operations Department personnel errors due to improved oversight and performance coaching.
'his change was completed in December 1993.
"Ownership" of Procedures by the Operating Crews
~
Each crew now has ownership of -75 procedures.
~
Each crew member owns 6-8 procedures and willbe responsible for the biennial reviews, VRV, and any required changes to their procedures.
~
Procedure are aligned to existing Operations Department system experts.
~
Procedures willbe rewritten in an effort to simplify and add necessary flexibility.
These changes were completed in October 1993.
improve Operations Problem Assessment and Resolution Skills
~
Improve operator turnover process.
~
Develop and implement a training module emphasizing effective prob-lem solving using a structured approach.
~
Balance simulator training to include more abnormal and transient conditions versus design basis accidents.
~
Through management training and improved accountability, encourage participation in decision making.
~
Develop and implement a training module on Technical Specification use and interpretation.
WIIHIICIOÃ~I' IIC I01I'I ~
(.Zl SUPPLY SYSTEM 930818
Reduce the Number of Equipment Operator Personal Errors Increased emphasis on self-checking through training.
Increased supervisory oversight and in-field coaching.
OPERATIONS PERSONAL ERRORS PERs QUARTER 1992 PERs
14 1993 PERs
26 Establish a Shift Manager/SRO Rotational Program
~
Increase number of experienced SROs by 10 to 16 over 1.S years versus planned five years.
~
Presently have 6 candidates in class to be examined March 94.
~
Hire experienced SROs from the industry or recruit qualified individuals from other WNP-2 organizations.
~
License at the SRO level (WNP-2).
~
Rotate these individuals and present SROs into the Control Room and to other organizations to ensure a higher level of Operations experience in:
Outage Management, Work Control, Maintenance, Training, Licensing, QA, NSAD, etc..
~
Benefits for Operations: broadens experience base, skills, increased expo-sure through specific assignments to critical areas in support of Plant Operations.
r Expected Coinpletion Date is October 199$.
Nl)HINfTDII tUlllCfoal ~
( D SUPPLY SYSTEM
~
~
~
Improve the Work Process
~
Reevaluate plant working hours to provide more backshift support (to be implemented following R-9).
- ~
Continued efforts to implement and streamline the PASSPORT and Total Exposure System.
~
Continue efforts to improve the schedule to accurately represent what is being worked.
Regain the previous trend in backlog reduction.
MWR¹ 800 BACKLOG REDUCTION CM MAINTENANCE 600 641 588 527
'89 495
~ Overall Goal
+ Production 525 400 265 200 JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR I
!94 Month Passport Implementation l1AlllllOlol' lllLICIONI ~
&3) SUPPLY SYSTEM 930818
L P
t
R-9 Challenges
~
Reduce personnel errors in the areas of:
Tagouts Lineups Refuel floor
~
Minimize exposure in an outage with significant radiological challenges:
Jet Pump Beam Replacement Control Rod Drive Changeouts Nozzle and Safe end stress reduction SRV changeouts 933318 69 SUPPLY SYSTEM
s WNP-2 lMPROVEMENTS Unit Operation Thermal Performance Unit availability 10.5 10.4 10.340 WNP-2 Annual Heatrates Based on Torsi MWHThermal and Toral Gross MWHElecldcsl tor each calendar yean 10,313 10.3 104 10.1 5 10.0 n0 9.9 9.8 9.7 9.6
"'"10,266"-""'-""
10,223 o
10,245
.....10,181..
9,991 n
--9,874'"
9.5 t
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Year II'O'INltCION te ~ LIC t01 lt C3) SUPPLY SYSTEM 9338I8
11.4 COMPARISON OF 35 BWRs-INPO DATA Based In INPO data trom July 1, tgg2 through June 30, 1993 11.2 I
11.
B 108 Ita ~
t-~c 106 10.4 10.2 (g 10.
9.8 9.916 9.6 9A WNP-2I 2
4I 5
7
9 1011 121314
1
1819 2021 22231242526272 2,30I311 BNR (from INPO database)
7.
MfNP-2 Annual Gross Generation Based on Total Gross MWHFJcctrlcal tor each calendar year.
7,463,120 6.
0x t
oc
0 cs
O U
ra vP
tg
"" 5,396,320 "
4,892,130
5,597,8 ha n
6,216,3 6,370,450
/CD 4,454,180
"iv Sr 5,997,690 5,993,2 70
~A/
lp, QrtL pl'
I
$.'gt 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Calendar Year 9308) 8 laA'llllNC'Iok~VllltPOWI ~
(-.S SUPPLY SYSTEM P'
~t Calendar Year Generation for WNP-2 Gross Gen.
MW-Hrs Net Gen.
MW-Hrs Capacity Factor
. Avail.
Factor 7,463,120 7,134,966 5,993,270 5,692,380 75.0%
59.7%
77 2%
62.7%
4,454, t 80 4,229,869 Performance Evaluations Jan. 1994 44 3%
47.9%
Benchmarking trips served as a stimulus for change SRO rotation program Reorganization of Control Room responsibilities Operator's ownership (control room deficiencies+ TMRS)
<<A'lllllGTON ~ VILIC ~ OIVII L9 SUPPLY SYSTEM to
100
CONTROL ROOM DEFICIENClES NON-OUTAGE AND OUTAGE (7/92 To 1/94)
70 I!
~
W
40
c.!
~ ~
10
J A
S
N D
J F
M A
M J
J A
S
N D
J IZZB NON-OUTAGE~
OUTAGE
TMR TRENDING The number of open TMRs at the end of each calendar quarter for 1993 are as follows;
30
20
15
0 First quarter (04/01/93)
Second quarter (07/01/93)
Third quarter (10/01/93)
Fourth quarter (01/01/94)
933BlB
!!I1OIIOOO! IVI(IClOOIO ( 3) SUPPLY S)STE4<
e
+
~
Chemistry Parameters Condensate filter demineralizer run lengths RWCU run lengths Reactor water chemistry
RMfCU RUN TlME 1993
25
O
1V
~ *
imp
~ \\
Jan Feb March April June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Date
~
I A!Ill)GVOl tCILIC ~ill l ~
6~2) SUPPLY SYSTEM t2
1ao.o
'AVERAGE GALLONS CONDENSATE FfLTER DEMINERALIZERS 120.0 cn 100.0 RO 80.0 Ug rr.
60.0 ao.o
~ 4 20.0
\\~1 0.0 CFD A CFD S CFD C CFD D CFD E CFD F
~ ~ ~ I EB New Resin Mixture R2 Former Resin Mix WNP-2 AVERAGE CONDUCTlVITY
.25
.20 E
~15 CA
.10
.05
.00
'\\
lp(
l
.I>>>l Kfyj
- 4%i Jtjlt
,C4;
'r,t ".
~ ~
'~ af,l
%fr l'4 4j rt i>>;.
l
- tltl)t
~.4 el:,
l lh 6j)
I
- ,rye%
roy~@.
v CV'I j
I
)"ill.
I
'i Itt
'Cl ii
~ Q
~ Il
- g,T
~ l.,
'~1:)
I 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 93QS18
>>>>l Ill >>CCOl
~ l' lIC PO>> l ~
43 SUPPLY SYSTEM
<A>>++>> e;< ~..<-q
<i.s>> ~
QVALITYASSURANCE DIRECTORATE Quality Assessment Division - Jeff Benjamin
~
Plant Assessment
- Joe Muth, 10 Technical Specialists and Engineers
~
Plant Support Assessment
- Stan Davison, 9 Technical Specialists and Engineers
~
Quality Control - CliffEdwards, 12 Engineers and Technical Specialists
~
WNP-1/3 Quality Assurance - Tom Houchins, 1 Technical Specialist SUccesses Organizational transition
~
Revised procedures
~
Revised expectations
~
Additional Operations training Challenges
~
Assessments
- Integrating 1 new manager and 8 new QA people
- Implementation of Functional Area concept
- Upgrading individual performance in Audits and Surveillance efforts
- Upgrading training for all Assessment staff
- Upgrading performance on item follow-up Quality Control
- Reevaluating the inspection process/methodology
- Upgrading individual performance
- Upgrading training/certification program for QC staff
<< A<<<< <<, '
<<<< ~ <' << C ~ <<<<<<
SUPPLY SYSTEM
Quality Support Division - John McDonald
~
Operating Event Analysis 9 Resolution - Dusty Rhoads, 8 Engineers R Technical Specialists Nuclear Safety Assurance - Steve Washington, 6 Engineers R Technical Specialists
~
Procurement Quality Assurance - Gary Wooley, 10 Engineers R Technical Specialists Successes
~
Supporting Root Cause transition
~
Coaching line personnel in cause analysis/corrective action
~
Revised expectations
~
Increased ISEG involvement with operations CbalIenges
~ Operating Event Analysis R Resolutions
- Redefinition of role in Root Cause process
- Integration of new personnel
- Refined trending
~ Nuclear Safety Assurance
- Redefinition of role and methods
- Timeliness of effort
~ Procurement Quality Assurance
- Maintain performance while improving efficiency 930ol8
>>>>l>>l>>GIOI
~ II~ LIC >>0>> II 4S SUPPLY SYSrEbi
Directorate Challenges/Initiatives
~
Responsibility for PER program management
~
Responsibility for Direct Line investigation/follow-up
~
Centralize trending/performance monitoring WAIHIICIOK ~ L' LIC I OWII C2 SUPPLY SYSTEM
%30Sl8
Lf
Corrective Action Program
~
Successe's
- Improvements in timeliness of evaluations.
- Improvements in tracking and meeting commitments
~
Areas for Improvement
- Completeness of the problem description
- Use and timing of prompt operability process
- Quality of proposed corrective actions
~ Actions
- Formed process user group to propose changes
- QA Assessments in November and January
- Plant Manager review of PERs
- QA review of significant deficiencies
~rkilll%4%0% tl'llIClOKI~
63) SUPPIY SYSTF&f
'V I
1POP TOTALPLANT ACTIONS VS. LATE PLANTACTIONS (NCRAs, MDRAs, PDRAs, OERs, REGNs, REGSs, PERAs, QFRAs, EMCs)
PLANTACTIONS 800 600 aoo
)
~
721
694 632 621 6 640636622636 613
591 P
'771 710735 659 873 842 771 745 713
631
71 Add!tlonat~
Regutatoty Commitments added 200 211226 225 189
0 (
J A
S 0 N DI J F
M A M J J
A S 0 N DIJ F
M A M
J J
A S
N DI J F
I
93 I
ga MONTH
~ TOTALACTIONS Q
LATEACTIONS As olJanuary 1993 Totals Include Long Term Acttons 160 SIGNIFICANTDEFICIENCY REPORTS Open NCRs, Includes Open Investigations and those Awaiting C/A completion 140 134"-.139 120 100
60 119 120 118 108::
107 102
........96.....I.......,
80
)
97 i:.
1
8
76- '"- -->>--"76 - 72.-
6p
.
.
)
63
I
61
"'- >>- -66-. "".
20
2p
22
22 226
24
"1'6.." 10"'"-tg -"1p....1p.....1p...r
J A
S
N D
I J
F M
A M
J J
A S
l)l D
I
CI RCA's ln progress+
Awaiting C/A cpt.+ Total Open NCRs llA)HlkG101 teI)IC fOAl~
(.S SUPPLY SYSTEM P
9309)8
40'
OPEN CORRECTIVE ACTIONS VS LATE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
(NCRAs, MDRAs, PDRAs)
350 300 293I:::I::::: 281 250 200
}254 257
'61 250 i
,n 22,:,.::'.j:,:
j 202 50'.
'
'.
'
I:
.j. 243235'235..i23723g
.244 240..'...j...i,,
j..(.,j"j",j..(."ij.... ~j ~ ~j. ~..
- 188 166 186 150
- 150:: '::;::,15;:.:,: 141
~.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~:. ~ '.....,.,
'48;-:"'I'143 '132" ".
128 127; 100
I
~
~
~
"et7-
18 7 00 0 IJASONDIJFMAMJ JASONDIJFMAMJ JASONDIJ FMAMJ JASONDJ
91
j
MONTH
+Corrective Actions IL GOAlFY-91~ GOALFY-9213-GOALFY-9& LATE TOTALDOES NOT INCLUDELONG TERM C/As AND ClAs AWAITINGADMINISTRATIVECLOSURE 8333)8
KAiNII
~ C,'(0%
~ Vl(IC tOIII ~
(.33 SUPPLY SYSTEM