ML17250B359
| ML17250B359 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/15/1989 |
| From: | Mike Williams NRC OFFICE FOR ANALYSIS & EVALUATION OF OPERATIONAL DATA (AEOD) |
| To: | Novak T NRC OFFICE FOR ANALYSIS & EVALUATION OF OPERATIONAL DATA (AEOD) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17250B360 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8912270152 | |
| Download: ML17250B359 (5) | |
Text
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'WA5KIHGTON, O. C. 20555 DEC 15 1989 HEHORANDUH FOR:
Thomas H. Hovak, Director Division of Safety Programs Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data FROH:
Hark H. Milliams, Chief Trends and Patterns Analysis Branch Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data
SUBJECT:
HINUTES OF COI0IOIIMEALTH EDISON/HUHARC/HRC NOVEHBER 29-30 1989 HEETIHG On November 29-30, 1989, representatives from the HRC staff met with the Commonwealth Edison staff and a representative from the Nuclear Hanagement Resources Council (NUHARC) at the Chicago Office of Coranonwea 1th Edison.
The meeting was scheduled as part of the Haintenance Indicator Demonstra-tion Project to discuss the staff's proposed Haintenance Effectiveness Indicator {HEI). This meeting was the first in a series of meetings to be held with individual utilities as part of the HEI Demonstration Project.
A list of attendees is attached.
The HRC staff presented the detail and logic followed by. the staff during the development process for the proposed maintenance indicator.
The intent of this presentation was to familiarize utility personnel with all the details necessary for understanding the proposed maintenance indicator.
Du< ing the course of the meeting it was determined that Coranonwealth Edison is mo'ving toward monitoring equipment (component) performance.
Honitoring of component reliability by Cow.onwealth Edison is in general consistent with the logic being followed by the NRC staff during the development of the proposed maintenance indicator. ln addition, it was determined that:
1) uti lization of component failures to measure the quality of maintenance is appropriate and useful,
- 2) utilization of failure rate increase methods is a reasonable way to approach the detection of changes in maintenance
- effects, and 3) the ODE equipment list/selection for the indicator is gener-ally consistent with Commonwealth Edison's priority listing for equipment ava i lab i 1 ity.
Feedback from Commonwealth Edison was in general positive and constructive.
The following recommendations were made:
( 1)
The current methods used to calculate the HEI may have to be revisited to make the indicator more useful to plant staff e.g.,
consider grouping failures by component type and by
- system, (2) the indicator should be sensitive enough to reflect on-going programs to address specific fixes for a given component i.e.,
check valves, MOV's, pumps, etc.,
(3) additional sources of data beyound NPRDS (GADS, Grey-book) may be useful to better describe ODE equipment performance.
cc:
E. jordan, AEOD M. Smith, NUHARC P.
- Kuhel, CECo PDR Hark H. williams, Chief Trends and Patterns Analysis Branch Office For Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data Distribution:
DSP RF TNOVAK VBENAROYA MW LIAHS ENNI G LBELL CENTRAL FILE lE:
.gep: RDENNIG 0E: 12//g/89: 12/9/89
~
~
~
~
- HMI 12/P 9
~
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
S t
4
~'TTENDANCE LIST November 29-30, 1989 Meeting FAINTEttANCE INDICATOR DEMONSTRATION PROJECT tNt4E Paul Kuhel Martin G. Kief Don Eggett Robert Lazon Thomas Kovach Lee A. Sues Walt Smith Larry Be 1 1 Pat O'Reilly Mark Williams Thomas Novak ORGAtt I ZATION Commonwea 1 th Edi son Commonwealth Edison Comoonwealth Edison Commonwealth Edison Coranonwealth Edison Commonwealth Edison NUtQRC NRC/AEOD HRC/AEOD NRC/AEOD HRC/AEOD
l 1