ML17352A803

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
SALP Repts 50-250/94-99 & 50-251/94-99 for 930131-940827
ML17352A803
Person / Time
Site: Turkey Point  
Issue date: 09/23/1994
From:
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML17352A802 List:
References
50-250-94-99, 50-251-94-99, NUDOCS 9410120064
Download: ML17352A803 (12)


See also: IR 05000250/1994099

Text

SALP REPORT - TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR PLANT

50-250/94-99

AND 50-251/94-99

BACKGROUND

The

SALP Board convened

on September

8,

1994, to assess

the nuclear

safety performance of Turkey Point Units 3 and

4 for the period

January

31,

1993,

through August 27,

1994.

The Board was conducted

per

Management Directive 8.6,

"Systematic

Assessment

of Licensee

Performance."

Board members

were Bruce A. Boger (Board Chairperson),

Acting Director, Division of Reactor Projects; Albert F. Gibson,

Director, Division of Reactor Safety; J. Philip Stohr, Director,

Division of Radiation Safety

and Safeguards;

and Herbert

N. Berkow,

Director, Project Directorate II-3,

NRC Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

This assessment

was reviewed

and approved

by Stewart

D.

Ebneter,

Regional Administrator,

NRC Region II.

PLANT OPERATIONS

This functional

area

addresses

the control

and execution of activities

directly related to operating the plant.

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

during this assessment

period.

Operator

performance

was excellent.

Operator training programs

were strong,

as evidenced

by exam results

and

performance

during unit startups,

shutdowns,

and events.

Operations

was

well supported

by management,

maintenance,

engineering,

and plant

support organizations.

Teamwork

among these

groups

was effective,

as

indicated

by strong outage

performance,

testing

and maintenance

activities,

and special

and infrequent tests

or evolutions where multi-

disciplined groups were effectively integrated.

Operators

responded

in

a timely and effective manner during abnormal

conditions

and unit

transients

such

as main condenser

tube leaks, turbine generator

problems,

and moisture separator

drain line steam leaks.

Operators

were

also alert

and proactive in addressing

abnormal

equipment indications

and associated

problems including reactor coolant

pump seal

problems,

a

pressurizer

manway leak,

and main generator

voltage fluctuations.

In

addition, operators

performed very well during planned

and short-notice

outages.

Management

oversight

and conservatism

were exemplary

and assured

safe

unit operation.

Conservative

operating decisions

were

made to remove

a

unit from service to repair degraded

equipment well before potential

failures or approaching

applicable technical specification limits.

Examples

included cold shutdowns to repair

a leaking pressurizer

manway

and

a leaking pressurizer

spray valve.

Effective management

oversight

and conservatism

were evidenced

by the thorough unit restart

readiness

verification process

used in returning

each unit to service following

refueling outages.

94i0i20064 9409~

PDR

ADOCK 05000250

Q

PDR

Independent

reviews

by quality assurance

and the safety review

committees

were effective

and demonstrated

a strong safety attitude

and

perspective.

for example, quality assurance

performed

a review of

operational

problems

and effectively identified root causes

and

corrective actions.

The onsite

and offsite safety revi,ew committees

conducted

comprehensive

self-assessments,

especially during reviews of

equipment degradation

and prior to unit startups

from refueling.

Root cause

and corrective action programs

were effective.

Event review

teams

were assembled

to perform collective, multi-discipl.ined, real-time

problem reviews.

These

teams

were successful

in identifying causes

and

proposing corrective actions.

Examples

included moisture separator

drain line steam leaks,

reactor trips,

emergency

core cooling system

minimum flow problems,

and emergency

containment cooler valve failures.

The licensee's

commitment to risk management

was evident.

Troubleshooting activities which could place the units at risk were

controlled by the "red sheet"

process.

This assured

that

a well

thought-out, detailed,

precise

plan was in place prior to commencing

work and that management

had reviewed

and concurred

in the process.

Infrequently performed tests

and evolutions were also controlled by a

special

administrative

procedure with requirements

for a pre-evolution

briefing and oversight

by an appointed test director and manager.

Hanagement

conservatism

and commitment to reduce

shutdown risk were

noted

by the practice of completely offloading the reactor core prior to

beginning mid-loop operations.

During a refueling outage,

a risk

assessment

team

was initiated to review critical path evolutions,

safety

system availability,

and risk.

This team

made recommendations

to change

the outage

sequence

in order to minimize overall risk.

Operators

generally displayed strong attention to detail with good

supervisory oversight.

However, late in 1993,

several

instances

of poor

control

room oversight resulted in a reactor trip, an overdilution

event,

and other noted errors.

These

issues

were partially caused

by

poor communications

and

a lack of self-checking.

management

aggressively

addressed

these

instances

by emphasizing

expectations

that

all personnel

meet

a high standard of performance

and accountability,

relocating the Assistant

Nuclear Plant Supervisors

into the controls

'area,

and improving oversight of non-licensed

operators.

These

actions

were effective,

as evidenced

by strong personnel

and unit performance

during the last six months of the assessment

period.

The Plant Operations

area is rated Category

1.

III.

NAINTENANCE

0

This functional

area

assesses

activities associated

with diagnostic,

predictive, preventive,

and corrective maintenance

of plant structures,

systems,

and components.

It also includes all surveillance testing

and

other tests

associated

with equipment

and system operability.

Overall

performance

in this area

was superior during this period.

Overall maintenance

program management

was

a strength during this

period,

as exemplified by effective processes

and well-qualified staff.

Hanagement

actions

were effective in eliminating past SALP-identified

weaknesses

involving the quality of work and surveillances.

Hanagement

involvement

and conservative

management

decisions

were evident.

The licensee

has

addressed

identified weaknesses

in maintenance

work

quality through individual counselling,

procedural

enhancements,

and

process

improvements.

Peer verification and self-checking

programs

were

also initiated to reduce the personnel

error rate.

These

management

actions

have

been effective in improving performance

in this area.

Performance

in the surveillance

area

improved during this period in that

personnel

and procedural

weaknesses

were effectively addressed.

Notwithstanding the improved performance,

there

were still some

surveillance-related

problems;

the most significant of which was caused

by

a lack of adequate

program oversight

and attention to detail.

This

resulted

in a number of missed valve surveillance tests.

However, the

licensee identified the problem near the end of the

SALP period

and took

effective followup actions.

Effective maintenance

work backlog management

resulted

in continued

reductions

in both the size

and

age of the backlog during this period.

Specifically, the non-outage

corrective maintenance

plant work order

(PWO) backlog,

PWOs greater

than

12 months old, control

room deficiency

tags,

and out-of-service control

room instruments

continued to decrease

as they have during the previous

two SALP periods.

In addition,

performance

has

been better than the licensee's

established

goals.

These

are strong indications of effective backlog management.

Excellent coordination

and cooperation

both within the maintenance

organization

and with other groups

was

a significant strength.

This was

a major contributor both to the maintenance

and operations

performance.

This was illustrated

by the repair of a leak on the Unit 4 spare control

rod drive mechanism

canopy seal, repair of a failed component cooling

water system outlet isolation valve associated

with the

3C emergency

containment cooler,

and troubleshooting of a July 1993 relay failure

while performing containment isolation periodic tests.

These efforts

were characterized

by excellent planning, interdisciplinary teamwork,

management

oversight,

high quality work,

and timely completions.

Two

exceptions to this good performance

were

a reactor coolant system

pressurization

prior to completion of seal table leak repairs

as

a

result of poor work control

and communications

weaknesses

and

a safety-

related

cable pull performed without calculating the pull stress

during

3B charging

pump work.

These lapses

were isolated occurrences;

and, in

both cases,

aggressive

and effective followup and corrective actions

were taken.

Haintenance

made significant contributions to excellent

equipment

reliability and plant availability.

No instrumentation

and control

(ISC)-related trips occurred during the period.

Haintenance

has

been

completed in a timely manner with good quality, contributing to safe

and

efficient refueling outages

and minimizing plant transients.

Some examples of superior maintenance

performance

include the efforts

related to auxiliary feedwater,

intake cooling water, startup

transformer,

and main feedwater

pump check valve maintenance

during

September

- October

1993; preventative

and corrective maintenance

as

well as troubleshooting

on the reactor protection

system

(RPS),

emergency diesel

generator

(EDG),

and safety injection (SI) motor in

late

1993; corrective maintenance

on valve packing,

RPS relays,

SI

motor,

and spent fuel pool components

in early 1994; motor-operated

valve,

EDG, reactor vessel,

erosion/corrosion,

and fuel up-ender

work in

April 1994;

and

18C troubleshooting of rod position indication problems

in October of 1993.

Exceptions to this excellent performance

included

a Unit 4 shutdown to

repair

a corrosion-induced

thimble tube leak on the incore instrument

system that

was most likely caused

by improper cleaning of the seal

table

area during

a previous

outage.

Also,

a lack of attention to

detail

and inadequate

procedures

led to high reactor cavity seal

leakage

due to missing studs

on nuclear instrumentation

covers during the

1993

Unit 4 refueling outage.

Many power reductions

and

some unit shutdowns

have

been necessary

during

this period

as

a result of balance-of-plant

(BOP) problems.

The root

causes

of the individual events

were assessed;

however, collective

causes

of and corrective actions for possible

challenges

to operators

and safety

systems resulting from BOP equipment failures or degradation

are of concern.

Pot'ential

inadequacies

relative to equipment

aging,

maintenance,

and design

should continue to be addressed.

The Maintenance

area is rated

Category l.

ENGINEERING

This functional

area includes activities associated

with the design of

plant modifications

and engineering

support- for operations,

maintenance,

and 'outage activities.

Performance

in this area continued to improve

'and

was

an important contribution to good performance

in other

functional areas.

Management

oversight

and control were effective in

improving performance.

Good teamwork was apparent

between

engineering

and other site

organizations.

For example,

engineering

design priorities were set

by a

Plant Review Board which included the Site Vice President

and the

Managers of Operations,

Maintenance,

and Engineering.

This process

assured

that the resultant plant modifications met the needs of user

organizations.

Engineers

from design,

technical

support,

and

construction organizations

worked together effectively to assure

proper

design, installation,

and testing of each modification.

Design

modification packages

were critiqued before

and after implementation.

Hanagement

of the backlog of engineering

work was effective.

The

backlogs of Requests

for Engineering Assistance,

Plant

Change

Modifications,

and Nonconformance

Reports

were reduced

in size,

appropriately prioritized,

and closely monitored

by station

management.

A long-term program to eliminate

a large backlog of drawing'pdates

was

successfully

completed early in the period.

System walkdowns

and

additional

updates

have continued to improve the quality of drawings.

Strong design

and system engineering

programs

provided good support to

operations

and maintenance.

System engineers

were well qualified and

exercised full responsibility for the condition of their assigned

systems.

Plant performance

was improved

by implementing the

recommendations

of reliability improvement teams.

Continued. reductions

in temporary

system alterations,

lighted annunciators

in the control

room,

and other operator

"work arounds"

reduced

the potential for

operator errors.

Weaknesses

in contractor oversight that were evident during the previous

SALP period were corrected

during this assessment

period.

A task force

was established

and corrective actions

implemented to strengthen

vendor

interfaces.

The licensee

continued to reduce

dependence

on contractors

for engineering

services.

Engineering

performance

was improved by strong self-assessment

efforts

which identified areas for improvement.

Effective corrective actions

were taken to address

the self-assessment

findings.

Weaknesses

in

engineering

performance identified in the previous

SALP period were

corrected,

and performance

measures

were established

and monitored to

assure

that challenging goals

were met.

The Engineering

area is rated Category

1.

PLANT SUPPORT

The Plant Support functional

area

addresses

all activities related to

radiological controls,

emergency

preparedness,

security, plant

chemistry, fire protection,

and plant housekeeping.

Performance

in the radiological controls area continued at

a high level.

The as low as reasonably, achievable

(ALARA) program was effective in

reducing doses,

both during outages

and routine operations.

Effective

ALARA activities during this period included the

use of mockup training,

source

term reduction efforts associated

with plant chemistry,

and the

installation of non-Stellite parts

and equipment.

Also, person-rem

managers

were assigned

by individual departments

to enhance

ALARA

efforts.

As

a result,

the

1993 personnel

exposures

were the lowest

since the beginning of plant operation.

The

1994 Unit 3 refueling

outage collective dose

was controlled to well within the dose goal for

the outage work.

Contamination control programs facilitated maintaining

internal

exposures

well below regulatory limits by effectively

maintaining

a relatively low contaminated floor area.

A well run

respiratory protection program also contributed.

Respirator

usage

was

reduced

as part of the effort to reduce total effective exposure,

without an appreciable

increase

in internal

exposures.

During the

period, there were

some isolated

cases

of failure to follow radiation

work procedures

associated

with personnel

dosimetry

and radioactive

material control requirements for which corrective actions

were promptly

implemented.

An aggressive

waste

management

program

was

implemented

which resulted

in minimizing the generation

and storage of dry

radioactive wastes.

Radiological effluents were well managed;

and

releases

were only a small fraction of the regulatory limits, as

verified by the environmental

monitoring program.

A weakness

was

identified in the program for measuring certain beta emitting

radionuclides

in liquids.

The weakness

included unexplained

biases

in

some measurements

and inadequate

procedures

and training for staff, but

this was not significant regarding environmental

doses.

Improvements

were

made to the meteorological

monitoring equipment with the addition

of supplemental

power supplies

and the upgrading of the electrical

switching equipment.

Radiological control

program audits were well

planned,

thorough,

and well documented

and followup actions

were timely

with items tracked to completion.

- Performance

in the emergency

preparedness

area continued to be strong.

With good management

support,

the emergency

preparedness

training

program maintained excellent

response

proficiency.

This was reflected

in excellent performance

during the full participation exercise

during

this period in which the emergency facilities were activated

and staffed

properly, events

were properly classified,

and notifications were timely

and proper with appropriate protective action recommendations.

Also,

the response

to an actual

event during this period was appropriate

and

in accordance

with the Emergency

Plan.

Emergency facilities and

equipment

were maintained

in an excellent manner.

Communications

enhancements

included the installation of a high frequency radio system

and

an upgrading of the containment public address

system.

The

emergency

preparedness

audit program,

including the exercise critique

process,

was considered

a strength.

Corrective actions

were sound

and

timely.

Interactions with offsite agencies

were effective,

and

good

working relations

were maintained with State

and local agencies.

Performance

in the physical security area continued at'

superior level.

Security training was effective, trainers

were knowledgeable,

and

an'.

extensive

array of training materials

and equipment

was available.

Management

support for this area

was evidenced

by the

new firing range

and training building.

The Security,

Contingency, Training,

and

gualification Plans

and implementing procedures

were maintained current.

Access controls were well maintained,

and the

new hand geometry

access

control program

was effectively implemented.

The number of loggable

security incidents trended

downward during the period

and was

reflective, in part, of good testing

and maintenance

support for the

security equipment.

Alarm assessment

aids were enhanced

with the

installation of an improved model of video capture

equipment,

reducing

the number of false

and nuisance

alarms.

Security audits were thorough

and detailed.

The fitness-for-duty

(FFD) program

was

a strength.

The

FFD staff was well trained

and qualified, collection facility operations

V

were well run, procedures

were good, conservative

screening

levels were

set,

and program audits were effective.

The fire protection

program performance

was generally good.

During the

period,

the fire brigade

responded

to four actual fires with the

response

being timely and effective in extinguishing the fires.

One of

the fires was outside of the protected

area at the HcGregor substation,

and this led to interaction with offsite support.

During the earlier

portion of the period there

were

some instances

of lack of attention to

detail associated

with failure to establish fire watches,

an inadequate

fire plan,

and

a failure to control combustible material.

However,

these

weaknesses

were not observed later in the period.

Overall,

housekeeping

was good, with a noted

improvement in the latter

portion of the period.

The Plant Support

area is rated Category l.