IR 05000424/1997099
ML20211F250 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Vogtle ![]() |
Issue date: | 09/15/1997 |
From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
To: | |
Shared Package | |
ML20211E060 | List: |
References | |
50-424-97-99, 50-425-97-99, NUDOCS 9709300389 | |
Download: ML20211F250 (6) | |
Text
-
. _ -
-.
d
.
SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE REPORT V0GTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT 50-424/97-99 AND 50-425/97-99 1.
BACKGROUND The SALP board convened on August 27, 1997, to assess the nuclear safety performance of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP) for the period January 28. 1996 through August 2. 1997.
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 of Reactor Projects. H. N. Berkow. Pirector.
Project Directorate 11-2. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR).
dnd C. A. Casto. Deputy Director. Division of Reactor Safety.
This assessment was reviewed and approved by the Regional Administrator.
II.
DLANT OPERATIONS This functional area addressed the control and execution of activities directly related to operating the facility.
It includes activities such as plant startup power operation, plant shutdown, and response to transients.
It also includes initial and requalification training programs for licensed operators.
Overall, performance in the plant operations area remained superior throughout this assessment period.
Management was involved in all aspects of plant operations and has taken several initiatives this period to strengthen performance of the operations staff.
Operational management decisions were conservative. A strong safety focus was demonstrated during risk-significant activities such as reactor plant startups and shutdowns, reduced reactor coolant system inventory conditions, and while maintaining plant conditions for retrieval of loose parts in a Unit 1 steam generator.
Operator knowledge and performance during plant maneuvers continued to be superior througbut the period.
This was demonstrated by handling plant transients effectively, proper implementation of the Emergency Operacing Procedures for reactor trips, thoroughly conducting the post-trip reviews and root cause analyses, and making emergency declarations in a timely manner. The licensed operator *. raining program resulted in excellent performance on NRC administered exams.
Actions have been initiated to improve training scenarios and documentation.
Strong operator performance was also demonstrated by appropriate control of reactivity changes, sound compensatory measures during periods of heightened risk, and coordination and planning for outage activities.
Several excellent observations were made by operations staff personnel that identified issues such as the discrepancy in the cooling water alignment to the safety injection pumas.
In general, excellent professionalism was demonstrated in t1e control room. Operator Enclosure 9709300309 970915 PDR ADOCK 05000424 O
.
.
.
.
.
distractions were kept to a minimum and lit annunciators were effectively and promptly addressed.
There were some limited instances of informality in the control room and deficiencies observed in operator diagnostic skills.
Although excellent implementation of routine plant operating and testing procedures was observed, an area for improvement was noted with implementation of valve and switch position verification as well as
<
infrequeni.ly performed procedures, such as containment closure veri fication.
Although the majority of the observations in this area have been issues of low safety significance, the repeated finding of containment debris existing following operations closeout inspections was of concern. At least in one of the instances, a condition existed which, had it not been corrected, could have been risk-significant.
The self-assessments conducted of the performance of plant o)erations were superior.
The Independent Safety-Engineering Group (ISEG)
assessments of system status, maintenance, and outage risk were timely
"
and provided specific recommendations to plant management on measures that could be taken to control plant configuration to minimize risk.
The ISEG review of configuration control issues prompted a thorough corrective action plan. Key operational transient activities such as startups and shutdowns were routinely monitored by both operations managers and ISEG observers, with feedback provided to the operations staff.
The Plant Operations area is rated Category 1.
III.
Maintenance This functional area addresses activities associated with maintenance of plant structures, systems, and components.
It also includes surveillance and other testing performed to ensure operability.
Overall, performance of maintenance activities was superior.
Conservative management decisions regarding maintenance activities were evident.
Decisions regarding power reductions for corrective maintenance exemplified management's concern for prudent operation of the units.
Refurbishment of major equipment. in a preem)tive manner, demonstrated a commitment to long-term safe operation.
Jeliberate decisions were made to delay startup after planned and forced outages to conduct corrective maintenance and appropriate reviews for equipment malfunctions.
Maintenance activities resulted in a high level of safety equipment performance and reliability, as evidenced by its operability during and following several plant trips.
Maintenance activities to maintain the Enclosure
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-
.
-
- - _
-. _ - -.
-
.
-.
._.
.-
.
._
-
,
.
,.
material condition of the plant were effective: however, the material condition of the nuclear service water system exhibited some weakness.
While corrective steps were taken to improve operation of nuclear service water, occasional debris fouling of small openings continued.
Self-identification of problems along with root cause determinations were effective in im) roving compliance with requirements.
Several cases were identified by t1e licensee where electrical circuits were not being tested properly.
In addition, effective self-evaluation by maintenance
'
personnel was demonstrated during performance of maintenance activities and in evaluation of the maintenance programs through line and independent audits.
Audit scope was focused with appropriate emphasis on identifying weaknesses and development of corrective actions.
- An effective inservice inspection program was apparent in completion of the ten-year inservice inspection requirement.
Aeactor vessel weld inspections were performed in a timely and proficient manner.
Examination personnel were knowledgeable and well-qualified and the walu;tions and resolutions of problems were appropriate.
Overall, personnel performance was good.
Althour s we personnel errors were noted in performing routine maintenance acth e.ies, most of these errors did not result in equipment inoperability or safety concerns.
Major maintenance activities were performed properly.
Equipment testing programs were effective with a few exceptions.
Some surveillance tests conducted for special conditions were missed due to personnel errors early in the SALP period.
However, most maintenance testing programs, including surveillance and post-maintenance testing, were effective.
Prerequisites were met before testing, instructions were followed, acceptance criteria were evaluated, and independent verification was performed according to program requirements.
The Maintenance area is rated Category 1.
IV.
ENGINEERING This functional area addresses the adequacy of technical and engineering support for all plant activities, including:
design control; design, installation; and testing of plant modifications, operations, outages, maintenance, testing, surveillance, procurement activities, design basis information and retrieval, configuration management, and support for licensing activities.
Engineering performance continued at a superior level during this Jeriod.
Previously identified strengths were maintained and challenges lave been addressed.
Effective engineering support for operations and maintenance was provided, particularly for major maintenance activities.
Engineering Enclosure
.
. __. __
_ _ _
_ _ _ _ _
_
_ _ _
_
._
__
-__
-.
i
- evaluations of.the failed control rod drive mechanism guide tube pin assembly and resultant damage to a steam generator tube sheet from loose parts were detailed and comprehensive. The engineering modification packages associated with the guide tube pin failure and the reactor coolant pump replacements were thorough. Also, the use of the Electric Power Research Institute Performance Prediction Model for Motor Operated Valves (MOVs) and the level of knowledge of industry MOV issues were identified as strengths.
Notwithstanding this overall strong support.
there were a few instances where engineering solutions were not as
thorough.
For example, although the licensee had performed several modifications to the nuclear service cooling water system to address debris problems, complete and long-term problem resolution was not
'
achieved and the system continued to experience small amounts of debris intrusion.
Management of engineering-related backlogs was a strength in the previous _ SALP period, and this excellent performance was sustained during this period.
Backlogs remained stable or t mnded downward in all categories.
Several self-assessments during this period performed by the Engineering organization and by other parts of the licensee's organizational components were comprehensive. effecti 'e in identifying deficiencies, and resulted in timely and well-managed corrective action plans and implementation. The quarterly trend reports were excellent trending tools.
The Plant Modifications and Maintenance Support Self-Assessment was proactive in that it reviewed programs in place to identify where future problems might occur. Safety Audit and Engineering Review audits of engineering activities were effective in identifying deficiencies in engineering performance.
Engineering support for licensing activities remained strong.
Requests for licensing actions and responses to generic letters and bulletins were generally sup)orted with comprehensive engineering evaluations.
The licensee kept 4RC well informed of the status of planned licensing action requests.
In support of the request for transfer of the operating license to the Southern Nuclear Operating Company. the licensee, on its own initiative, provided a complete update with supporting information on all license transfer issues since the initial application was filed in 1992.
Prior to the NRC industry-wide initiative to determine the degree of licensees * conformance with their design bases, the licensee initiated a comprehensive Updated Final Safety Analysis Report accuracy verification orogram. Also, the licensee has maintained the Vogtle Design Manual with cross-references to important design and licensing basis documents used during design.
licensing and operations up-to-date since original plant construction.
Licensee management continued to focus on reducing personnel errors. As a result of a previous SALP challenge. the licensee revised its process to ensure more thorough checking by all cognizant individuals and Enclosure
'
-
-
.
_ -.
.
..
.-
. - -
.
..
.
.-
.
.
groups. _ lt also developed written criteria to define what constitutes major and minor design changes to assure appropriate checks and reviews.
However, some examples of a lack of attention to detail, failures to maintain procedures up to-date to reflect plant modifications, and procedural compliance problems continued to occur and require continued management focus.
The Engineering area is rated Category 1.
.
V.
PLANT SUPPORT This functional area addresses radiological controls, radioactive effluents, chemistry, emergency preparedness, security, fire protection and housekeeping.
Overall performance in the area of Plant Support was considered superior.
The chemistry and emergency preparedness programs performed at high levels.
Security and radiological controls 3rograms reached a high level of performance during this SALP period.
ire protection and housekeeping programs were also implemented very well.
,
Radiological controls were effectively implemented.
External exposures were evaluated properly and controls were well managed.
Internal e,^osure controls and monitoring were effective as well.
Programs for general and specialized training, as well as for qualifications functioned well.
Improvements were made in planning and work practices.
Dose control was kept at reasonable levels considering the challenges of completion of the ten-year inservice inspection program, comprehensive examination of control rod guide tube pins. and completion of two planned and several forced outages.
Posting and controls for radiation areas were ap3ropriate: and labeling for radioactive materials was excellent.
T1e ALARA program adequately protected workers from excessive exposure.
E Management and implementation of the primary and secondary coolant chemistry program resulted in effective operation of steam generators and primary systems.
Primary and secondary laboratory quality control activities resulted in accurate measurements.
Programs designed to control and monitor liquid and airborne radionuclide releases were maintained and implemented properly, with releases well within regulatory limits. Audits were broad, independent, and thorough, with
,
corrective actions identified and tracked to closure.
Emergency preparedness capabilities resulted in accurate assessments of plant conditions along with prompt response and resolution of adverse conditions.
Exercise weaknesses were appropriately identified and resolved.
Emergency response-facilities and equipment were well equipped and maintained.
Notification and communications capabilities were excellent. The Emergency Plan and procedures underwent thorough
-
audits.
Emergency preparedness training was effectively implemented.
Enclosure
-
-
-
. - -.
- - -
.
..
--
.
,
Improvements in the security program resulted in effective performance.
Proper response efforts resulted from effective training and -
qualification programs. Security responses to contingencies were effective in interposing the threat. An effective contingency response capability was demonstrated during high quality drills. The licensee maintained control of personnel, Jackages, and vehicles.
System equi) ment was well maintained wit 1 high reliability and availability.
The ritness-for-Duty program was effective, with few exceptions.
Plans and procedures were well-documented.
Minor errors in the procedure revision process were promptly corrected.
The fire protection 3rogram was well implemented.
Staffing, training, and performance of t1e fire brigade organization were good, except for some radio communication problems.
Fire protection equipment was generally well maintained. Self-assessments and quality assurance audits were thorough and adverse findings were corrected in a timely manner.
Although housekeeping continued to be excellent, the high levels of housekeeping conditions generally noted throughout the plant were not as evident with respect to maintenance activities associated with containment. Several examplas of containment post-outage cleanliness demonstrated that continued management attention is needed to prevent a decline in performance.
The Plant Support area is rated Category 1.
i Enclosure
'
l
--
.
. - -.
-
_ _.