ML18010A992
| ML18010A992 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 01/07/1993 |
| From: | Vaughn G CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Ebneter S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18010A991 | List: |
| References | |
| HO-920183, NUDOCS 9302020127 | |
| Download: ML18010A992 (10) | |
Text
Carolina Rower 4 LlcihtCompany Harris Nuclear Plaat P. 0. Box 165 New Hill,North Carolina 27562
- o. E. VAU0HN trico Prcsidcnt Harris Nuclear Plant ENCLOSURE 3
- 7 lBy-Letter Number
HO-920183 Mr. S.
D. Ebneter, Regional Administrator United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street, NW
- Atlanta, GA 30323 SHEARON HARRlS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO.
50-400/LECENSE NO. NPF-63
RESPONSE
TO NRC SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LlCENSEE PERFORMANCE
Dear Mr. Ebneter:
Carolina Power and Light Company (CP&L) has received and reviewed the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) report transmitted by the NRC on November 2S, 1992.
CP&L appreciates the opportunity to discuss the SALP results at t:he December 11, 1992 meeting.
We appreciate your recognition that the overall performance of the Harris Plant was superior with maintenance/surveillance and safety assessment/quality verification exhibiting good performance, CP&L recognizes that there are still opportunities for improvement at the Harris Plant.
As a new SALP cycle begins, we will continue to look for ways to improve in all functional areas of our. operation.
Attached are CP&L's specific comments on the report.
lf you would like to discuss them in more detail, please ca11 us at your convenience.
Yours very t uly, Vice Presf.dent Harris Nuclear Plant MGW:dmw Attachment cc:
Mr. N.
B. Le Mr. J.
E. Tedrow NRC Document Control Desk.
MEN/HO-920183/1/OS1 9302020127 '93010r PDR ADQCK 05000400 G
ATTACHMENT IV.
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS Section C.
MAINTENANCE/SURVEILLANCE Page 8, First Paragraph; Sixth Seneence The 'NRC report states that ane AFM actuation was reported while troubleshooting
- a steam generator level instrument.
The referenced AFW actuatian occurred on
'ay 21,
- 1991, during the prior assessment period which ended June 1,
1991.
LER 91-009 which reported ehe event was considered among ehe total af forty-five LERs identified in the prior assessment period.
Accardingly, CPSL requests that reference to this AFV actuation be removed from the SALP final report.
V, SUPPORTING DATA AND SUMMARIES SECTION G.
REVIEW OF LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS
{LERs)
Page 21:
During a November 30,
- 1992, telephone conversation between Mr. Michael wallace (CP&L) and Mr. Darrell Roberts of your staff, an error was identified in the number of LERs listed by cause.
The report states that there were three (3) LERs attributed to the Personnel
- Operating Activity and ehree
{3) LERs attributed.
eo Personnel
- Other.
As agreed upon during the referenced conversaeion the correct number is one (1)
LER attributed to the Personnel
- Operating Activityand five (5) LERs aeeributed to Personnel
- Other.
MEM/HO-920183/2/Osl
c
~
ENCLOSURE 4
SALP Board Disposition of CP&L Comments The SALP Board reviewed the CP&L comments on the initial SALP Report for Shearon Harris Nuclear Plant.
They proposed the following disposition:
I 1.
Page 8
( lV.C. 1) Haintenance/Surveillance
'Discussion:
The Board concludes the licensee's comment is correct.
The AFW system actuation occurred outside of the assessment period.
The example will be deleted.
2.
Page 21 (V.G) Review of Licensee Event Reports (LERs)
Discussion:
The Board concludes the licensee's comment is correct.
The LER table will be revised to reflect one LER attributed to personnel error due to operating activity and five LERs will be attributed to personnel error-other.
3.
Changes An errata to pages 8 and 21 are in Enclosure 5.
~Pa e
Coversheet 21 21 Lines 33-35 31 34 ENCLOSURE 5
ERRATA SHEET Initial SALP Re ort
. Initial SALP Report One AFW System....
...to personnel error Final SALP Re ort Final SALP Report Sentences deleted
ENCLOSURE INITIAL SALP REPORT U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT 0
LICENSEE PERFORMANCE Inspectio Report Number 5 -400/92-20 Carolina ower and Light Company Shearon Harris Ju 2,
1991 to September 26, 1992
ENCLOSURE FINAL SALP REPORT U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION II SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE Inspection Report Number 50-400/92-20 Carolina Power and Light Company Shearon Harris June 2,
1991 to September 26, 1992
2.
The Radiological Environmental Honitoring Program was implemented effectively'.
Collection stations were calibrated and well maintained.
Licensee sample r suits compared favorably with those of the State of Nor h
Carolina.
Overall, the, radiological environmen al data indicated that plant operations had no signifi ant impact on the environment or public health and safety.
Shipping and handling of radwaste were efjncient, reflecting the competence,
- training, and experience/of the staff.
In
- general, shipping documentation was in ompliance with requirements.
During this assessment
- period, no iolations were cited.
Performance Ratin 3.
Category:
1 Board Recommendations None C.
Maintenance Surveillance
~Anal sis This functiona area addresses those activities related to equipment co ition, maintenance, surveillance performance, and equipme t testing.
Performa ce of maintenance and surveillance activities contin d to be effectively performed.
For the majority of activ'es
- observed, performance of work was good 'with prop r documentation of removed or replaced components and in pendent verification of their reinstallation.
intenance efforts to decrease air lock leakage were ffective.
- However, instances of inattention to detail were also noted.
One reactor trip occurred during the performance of a maintenance surveillance test when a
pressure pulse occurred on the common leg of the three reactor coolant flow detectors while a flow transmitter was being returned to service.
One AFW system actuation was reported while troubleshooting a steam generator level instrument.
The cause was attributed to personnel error.
An additional weakness was noted where licensee personnel failed to properly reference the equipment technical manual during an oil addition to the turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump.
The resultant improper oil level could have caused pump damage if not corrected.
I
2.
The Radiological Environmental Honitoring Program was implemented effectively.
Collection stations were calibrated and well maintained.
Licensee sample results compared favorably with those of the State of North Carolina.'verall, the radiological environmental data indicated that plant operations had no significant impact on the environment or public health and safety.
Shipping and handling of radwaste were efficient, reflecting the competence,
- training, and experience of the staff.
In
- general, shipping documentation was in compliance with requirements.
During this assessment
- period, no violations were cited.
Performance Ratin 3;
Category:
1 Board Recommendations None Haintenance Surveillance
~Anal sis This functional area addresses those activities related to equipment condition, maintenance, surveillance performance, and equipment testing.
Performance of maintenance and surveillance activities continued to be effectively performed.
For the majority of activities observed, performance of work was good with proper. documentation of removed or replaced components and independent verification of their reinstallation.
Haintenance efforts to decrease air lock leakage were effective.
-However, instances of inattention to detail were also noted.
One reactor trip occurred during the performance of a maintenance surveillance test when a
pressure pulse occurred on the common leg of the three reactor coolant flow detectors while a flow transmitter was being returned to service.
An additional weakness was noted where licensee personnel failed to properly reference the equipment technical manual during an oil addition to the turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump.
The resultant improper oil level could have caused pump damage if not corrected.
~ 21 Confirmation of Action Letters None.
Reactor Tri s The unit experienced four reactor trips at power during this assessment period and one reactor prot ction system actuation occurred 'on July 13, 1992, while the ant was in the hot standby condition.
The trips were:
~
June 3, 1991; Automatic rea or trip from full power while performing a maintenance c
ibration procedure on a reactor coolant system flow trans tter.
July 12; 1992; Automati reactor trip from full power due to a failed main condense boot seal and resultant low condenser vacuum.
~
July 15, 1992; Man 1 reactor trip from 30 percent power due to the loss of th main feedwater pump following deenergization o
an electrical bus for breaker removal.
~
July 17, 1992; Automatic reactor trip from full power due to, a failed main condenser boot seal and resultant low condenser va uum.
Review of Licen e Event Re orts LERs During the as ssment period, 22 LERs were analyzed.
Special reports were submitted during the period by the licensee but are not include in the table.
The distribution of these events by
- cause, as etermined by the NRC staff, was as follows:
Cause Compo nt Failure Desi
/Procedures Con ruction/Fabrication stallation P rsonnel Operating Activity
-Maintenance Activity
-Testing/Calibration Activity
-Other Other 5
4 Totals 22
21 Confirmation of Action Letters None.-,
~Rt Tt The unit experienced four reactor trips at power during this assessment period and o'e reactor protection system actuation occurred on July 13, 1992, while the plant was in the hot standby condition.
The tr'ips were:
~
June 3,
1991; Automatic reactor trip from full power while.,
performing a maintenance calibration procedure on' reactor coolant system flow transmitter.
July 12, 1992; Automatic reactor trip from full power due to a failed main condenser boot'seal and resultant low condenser vacuum.
P July 15, 1992; Hanual reactor trip from 30 percent power due to the loss of the main feedwater pump following deenergization of an electrical bus for breaker removal.
July 17, 1992; Automatic reactor trip from full power due to a failed main condenser boot seal and resultant low condenser vacuum.
Review of Licensee Event Re orts LERs During the assessment
- period, 22 LERs were analyzed.
Special reports were submitted during the period by the licensee but a'e not included in the table.
The distribution of these events by
- cause, as determined by the NRC staff," was as follows:
Cause Component Failure Design/Procedures
~
Construction/Fabrication Installation Personnel
-Operating Act'ivity
-Maintenance Activity
-Testing/Calibration Activity
-Other Other 1
2 4
5 0
Totals 22