ML18102A142

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Attendance List & Slides for Mgt Meeting Conducted on 960524.Addl Info Outlining Issues Re Plant Fuel Handling Bldg Ventilation Encl
ML18102A142
Person / Time
Site: Salem  PSEG icon.png
Issue date: 05/28/1996
From: Larry Nicholson
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To: Eliason L
Public Service Enterprise Group
References
NUDOCS 9606030116
Download: ML18102A142 (57)
v • d • e


Text

May 28, 1996 Mr. Leon R. Eliason Chief Nuclear Officer & President Nuclear Business Unit Public Service Electric and Gas Company P. 0. Box 236.

Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038

SUBJECT:

MANAGEMENT MEETING ON MAY 24, 1996

Dear Mr. Eliason:

This letter transmits the attendance list and slides presented at the management meeting conducted on May 24, 1996.

The meeting was very helpful for us to understand your goals and accomplishments of the outage.

Additionally, attached is an outline of the issues.relating to the Salem fuel handling building ventilation. Although the specific details will be provided in Inspection Report 50-272/311-96-80, we are providing this outline to support your timely resolutions.

Thank you for you_ cooperation.

Docket Nos. 50-272/311 Attachments:

1.

list of Attendees

2.

Slides ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:

Larry E. Nicholson, Chief Projects Branch 3 Division of Reactor Projects

3.

Salem Fuel Handling Building Ventilation Issues 9606030116 960528 PDR ADOCK 05000272 P

PDR

(

L Mr. Leon R. Eliason 2

cc w/encl:

L. Storz, Senior Vice President - Nuclear Operations E. Simpson, Senior Vice President - Nuclear Engineering E. Salowitz, Director - Nuclear Business Support C. Warren, General Manager - Salem Operatfons C. Schaefer, External Operations - Nuclear, Delmarva Power & Light Co.

J. Benjamin, Director - Quality Assurance & Nuclear Safety Review D. Powell, Manager, Licensing and Regulation R. Kankus, Joint Owner Affairs A. Tapert, Program Administrator R. Fryling, Jr., Esquire M. Wetterhahn, Esquire P. MacFarland Goelz, Manager, Joint Generation Atlantic Electric Consumer Advocate, Office of Consumer Advocate William Conklin, Public Safety Consultant, Lower Alloways Creek Township Public Service Commission of Maryland State of New Jersey State of Delaware

./

'(.

Mr. Leon R.' El i a son 3

Distribution w/encl:

Region I Docket Room (with concurrences)

Kay Gallagher, DRP Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)

D. Screnci, PAO NRC Resident Inspector L. Olshan, Program Manager, NRR W. Dean, OEDO J. Stolz, PDI-2, NRR M. Callahan, OCA Inspection Program Branch, NRR (!PAS)

PUBLIC DOCUMENT NAME:

g:\\branch3\\attach.mtg To receive a copy of this document, inclicale in the box:

"C' = Copy without attachmentjenclos e "E' = Copy with attachmentjen losu "N' = No copy OFFICE NAME DATE OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

ATTACHMENT 1 LIST OF PRINCIPAL ATTENDEES L. Eliason, Chief Nuclear Officer and President L. Storz, Senior Vice President, Nuclear Operations.

E. Simpson, Senior Vice President - Nuclear Engineering J. Polyak, Manager, Radiological Safety J. Benjamin, Director QA D. Powell, Licensing & Regulations Manager P. Moeller, QA/NSR N. F. Conicelli, Manager, Salem Projects D. Garchow, Director, System Engineering M. Straubmuller, Nuclear Control Operator

  • J. Robertson, Senior Nuclear Shift Operator J. Palombo, Nuclear Equipment Operator W. Stewart, PSE&G - Communications Thomas T. Martin, Regional Administrator, Region I William Kane, Deputy Regional Administrator, Region I Richard Cooper, Director, Division of Reactor Projects, (DRP)

Susan Shankman, Acting Deputy Director, DRP Larry Nicholson, hief, Projects Branch 3, DRP William Ruland, Chief, Electrical Engineering Branch, Division of Reactor Safety (DRS)

Robert DePriest, Reactor Engineer, Projects Branch 3, DRP Charles Marschall, Senior Resident Inspector, Salem Steve Varga, Director, PDI-2, NRR John Stolz, Project Director, PDI-2, NRR Lenny Olshan, Project Manager, NRR James Linville, Technical Assistant, DRP James Wiggins, Deputy Director, Division of Radiation Safety (DRS)

William Dean, Senior Regional Coordinator, OEDO OUTSIDE M. Gray, Reporter - Today's Sunbeam R. Kankus, Joint Owner Affairs K. Kille, Delaware Emergency Management Agency D. Camapbell, Delmarva Power

-P~ Duca~ Delaware Power- -

D. Zinnoni, New Jersey Bureau of Nuclear Engineering L. Megargle George, PECO Nuclear

SALEM 2; REST ART UPDATE MEETING Jl.TTACHMENT PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY SALEM UNIT 2 MAY 24, 1996

~

AGENDA

  • Outage Work & Performance Indicators
  • Next Steps
  • Independent Oversight
  • Summary

OUTAGE WORK &

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

OUTAGE WORK &

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

~¥~~.

q,1r:mrL1\\'.:r*1:*1:1\\?.

r-~:;:l::_*;-:*~J:.:1 *f.. 1 t-=:/

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR RELATIONSHIPS ANI INPO NRC PSE&G G

2 2

QTR.

3 outliers -

TIME

OUTAGE. WORK &

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

- Ventilation (Hagan)

- Air Systems Digital Feed Total Outage Workscope - 30,000 Activities

OUTAGE WORK &

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS VIDEO

OVERALL OUTAGE SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE S2,S3 & SC OVERALL OUTAGE SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE Mode 4 Svnch 35000 -.-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*.di ~~~~-~~~~~~

30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 0

c:

l1l I c:

l1l Actual workoff 00 LO 00 N

I I

I I

..Q

..Q c:

c:

Q)

  • Q) l1l l1l u_

u_

  • Complete Mid - Loop LO N

O'l

~ ~..-

00

~

00

~ N N

N I

I I

..Q

..Q

..Q Q)

Q)

Q) u_

u_

u_

~

~ N N

~

~ ~ N

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ! ! ~-

[

    • -W-EEKLY COMPLETE __ _

- CURRENT PREMIS Core Reload O'l

<D

(")

0

<9

(")

0

~ ~

00 LO 00 LO N

en LO N

en

<D I

N

(")

N N

I N

I I

N N

I N

I I

c:

I I

I "5

I I

I Cl Cl I

I I

0.

I I

I l1l

J c:

c:

c:.....,

"5 "5

"5

J
J Cl Cl Cl Q)
0.
0.
0.

~

l1l l1l l1l

J
J
J c{

c{

J
J
J en Q)

Q)

Q)

~ ~ ~

c{

c{

c{

en en en

-COMPLETION GOAL

---COMPLETE

SALEM UNIT 2 CONTRO.L ROOM I

I DEFICIENCIES..

I

-- **-*------- -------*------------------------T'"*

Salem Unit 2 Control Room Deficiencies 200 150 100 50 0

3/24/96

417/96 4/21/96 5/5/96 5/19/96 6/2/96 6/16/96 6/30/96

[

llilWork-in-Progress

  • Scheduled or Planned I

Week Ending I :

rJ Hold*

Iii New Initiated Yellow -: Work in Progress Dark Blue - Scheduled or Planned Gray - On Hold Light Blue - New Initiated I

SALEM UNIT 2 WORKAROUNDS Salem Unit 2 Work Arounds 4f7/96 4/21/96 5/5/96 5119196 612/96 6116196 6130196 7114196 I

Week Ending I

[....

w;;-;i(..j-;;_p~~gr-;;~; -

--iii:i~iiHold

.. - ----- --. liiililscheduled or Planned I

!:::*~ewln'.Uat':.d _______ *----=Scheduled ~e~~c_t!o.':1... _____ -_ -Excellence I

Dark Blue - Work in Progress Light Blue - Hold Gray - Scheduled or Planned White - New Initiated

SALEMUNIT2 TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS Salem Unit 2 Temporary Modifications 25 Better

=

20 r

15 t

L".

I 1*.

10

\\....._ __

5

. ----------~

I:.

0 12-Apr 26-Apr 12-May 26-May 9-Jun 23-Jun 7-Jul

  • 21-Jul 4-Aug 18-Aug 1-Sep 15-Sep 29-Sep I

Week Ending I

OPERATIONS PROCEDURE BACKLOG 500

_____________________________________ _ l:1_1li! ~!~~-~~~-~~_., ___ ~

r_o_~~-~~-~~ 13ack_l~g __________ _ _

450 400 350 300 200 100 50

. -. -*. -. --+-**- --- - --.

t Apr-7 May-19 Jun-2

- - - - Mode 6 Goal l _*_*-*-*----~-:-n_d_e_:-:_s-t-art H. : : ~--~~:-"~_--,

~:;~~=o~I

--Mode 1,2,3,4 Responsible Manager: Chris Bakken Black - Mode 6 Dark Blue - Mode 1,2,3,4 Aqua - Mode 5 White - Non-Restart I* ---

Jun-16 Jun-30

OUTAGE.WORK&

PERFORMAN.CE INDICATORS

  • Changing work processes

- Preventive Maintenance Program

- Foreign* Material Exclusion.

- Tagging Process

- Work Week Management

OUTAGE WORK &

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Operations Training e

. OPERA TOR CONTINUING TRAINING

  • Assessme,nt Evaluations Performed for All Operator Positions.
  • Testing' done at initial licensing level

-Written

-Simulator

- Plant walkthrough

  • All evaluations done consistently across crews
  • Developed database of weaknesses

OPERA TOR CONTINUING TRAINING

~~~\\fJIV~,

-~::!~L~--11r*~-~~-

.~ --.

.~~

C:-'.-?Hn..-...-................. ~

S>>1c~8, 1ll*~:i:;r}1'**1*','1*1*1 r:.**... *:-.:.--.-~l - l

, 1*

.I

  • Corrective Action - Startup Training Program

-14 Week Program

  • Theory
  • Accident analysis *
  • Systems review

- Simulator training

- Entire shift trained together,

- Procedure upgrades done with crews

OPERA TOR CONTINUING TRAINING

  • Group One results - Total 40 people Written Evaluations Nuclear Equipment Operators Nuclear Control Operators Senior Reactor Operators flt Assessment
  • Final Exam

OPERA TOR INITIAL TRAINING

  • Fast Track Senior Reactor Operator Program Status

- NRC Examination Scheduled for July 8th

- First Four Shift Technical Advisors Completed Simulator and Classroom, Beginning On the Job Training/On the Job Evaluation In Plant.

- Final Two Shift Technical Advisors Finish Simulator/Classroom in June.

OUTAGE WORK &

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

"~~~,;~~ti,

........... ____ i*:r-----*-**-

(

W/.">>'Y',_.

........,,~

~~l i:W...W/H..-N,..,.... ~

.--------------. Sv0,r1.rnr111*1*i Culture Change

NUCLEAR BUSINESS UNIT CULTURAL BERA VIORS

-~\\~~V,~,

=~<t:_~-~1<11;;----~--

3

~

---5;i~IL:rnnmr=/Hmu-..

SELF ASSESSMENT SELF IDENTIFIED PROBLEMS CORRECTIVE ACTION

B I

G T

R 0

u B

L E

NBU OPERATING PHILOSOPHY "Keep the Plant in the Desired State" Safety Limits Safety System Limit Settings r------------------------------------ ------------------ --

I I

I r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I r'1

~

~

I Action Statements Licensing Basis Limiting Condition for Operation

~

Procedures Administrative Controls DESIRED STATE I

~----------------'

t"" >

~

(fl B

I G

T R

0 u

B l

E

OUTAGE WORK &

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS rfOOLS TO CHANGE AND MONITOR CULTURE

  • Performance Rating
  • Employee Meetings

- Senior Reactor Operator

- Supervisory

- Employee Survey Feedback

-All Hands

- Senior Management

  • Communications Exchange
  • Performance Indicators

- Corrective Action

- Self Assessment

- Employee Concerns

  • Culture Index
  • Special Programs

- MARC Training

- Dale Carnegie

- Breakthrough Leadership

OUTAGE WORK &

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Human Performance

~.

APPRAISAL I PERFORMANCE RATING RESULTS-NUCLEAR BUSINESS UNIT J--~~~\\

,S:i.r;~\\rl~mn -i 1200 1090 1075 1000 800 710 C1) -c. 600 0

C1)

Q.

400 200 141 119 74 22 23 0 ---

1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1 ~ *95 Merit ~ *95 Tier ~ *gs Meritj

NUCLEAR BUSINESS UNIT Vs EXAMPLE DEPARTMENT-MERIT APPRAISALS 80°/o 79%

70o/o 60°/o 50°/o 40%

32%

30°/o 20%

10°/o 9%

6%

6%

2%

0°/o 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 11111 '96 NBU Merit !lll '96 Dept. "X" Merit I

NUCLEAR BUSINESS UNIT CULTURE SURVEY NBU Culture Survey 12 11 10 9

8 7

Salem Hope Creek Engg QA/NSR Ops Servs Bus Sprt Responsible Manager: Chuck Johnson

-September mmm!ilMarch

-Target NBU The culture survey measures our progress in five critical areas: high management expectations via strong mission and goals, high level of knowledge and skills, strong lateral integration(tearnwork), simple work processes, and self improvement culture and programs.

INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENT CULTURE SURVEY CHANGE NuclearSafelyRe\\1'1ew 143

....................... ~~~

~--******

....... ~

.... ~

..................................... iiifiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiifiiiiiiiiiiii P.-..................... 1!11"

.... ~

.......... ~

........... ~

........... P.-.-.............. ~.

........................ ~

Licensing 121 Corr e ctiv e Action & Quality Servic es 1 35 Hope C reek QA 292 S al em QA 291 All OAINSR S ite Plann ing 135 Information Sys tem s 165 Nu clear Procur ement & M eler i els 118 Fnanclal Se r vic es 162 All Business S er vic es Nuclear Fu e l 122 Sp e ci all y Engineer ing 123 Hop e Cre ek Sy stem Engineering 10 2 Sal em Syst em Engineering 062 C om pone n I R e Ii e b llit y 1 4 4 Hope Cr eek D es i gn E ng ineer ing 114 Sa lem E lec t rical En g in eer ing 126 S e l em Mechanical En g ineering 1 25 C1v 1llS tructural Plant E ng ineering 1 2 8 Nu c lear En g in ee ri ng Projects 148 All Nuclesr Engineering Nuclear Training 116 Nu c lear S e c uri l y 115 In - Pro cessing 091 Project Management & Insta ll ation 138 Rad i olog ic al S afet y 133 Me inlenan c e S er vic es 113 All 0 l)erations S ervic es S elem Planning 167 Sal em C hem is try 14 7 Selem Red Pro 065 S1le m M1 in lenan c e C ontrols 146 Sal e m Mechanical Ma in tenan c e 063 S alem G M / Sp e ci a l Projects 069 S alem Op erations 06 1 All S e lem O peret i ons Hop e Cre ek Chem 1stry 131 Hope Cr eek Rad Pro 105 Hope C reek Co ntrols 1 30 Hop e C reek Ma in tenan c e 103

..................................... ~~::~:::~

*~

. :::~

~:::~
* ~--~

---~

---*~

      • ~
  • -*~

---~

      • jiiiiiii~~~*....
        • 1"-!!-.

Hope C reek Op era tio n s 101 All Hope C reek O perations EntireNBU

- 2

..... ~

- 1 0

2 3

OUTAGE WORK &

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Self Assessment Corrective Action

(.

SALEM PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 Impact of Salem System Walkdowns (July & August)

Additional walkdowns Unit 2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 1995 1996

SOURCE OF PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED AT SALEM Source of Problems Identified at Salem & Percent Self Identified 100%

200 90%

80%

(/J E 150 -

Q)

i5 0.....

a..

70%

-0 Q) 60%

'+= E Q) 0 100 Q)

..c 50%

~ -

40%

Qi (f)

E

s z

~

30%

0 50 20%

10%

0 0%

Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun l:~ll~~~

ID...,.QAfNSR

~~:rna; u~-~~lfR:v::ling --0-::~~f ID --- Imp. needed -Excellence Note: Self ID clipped for greater detail in smaller columns - 681 items were self identified in Feb.(Mar 585, Apr 587

c.

PROBLEMS DUE TO HUMAN ERROR - OPERATIONS CREV's DUE TO HUMAN ERROR 10 9

8 7

6 5

4 3

2 0

.,I,_

  • Procedure OSafety
  • Routines mother

SALEM CORRECTIVE ACTION PROCESS JAN I FEB I MAR APR NEW CRs SALEM CORRECTIVE ACTION PROCESS APRIL 294 I 482 I 252 296 COMPLETION OF SCHEDULED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FOR MONTH AVERAGE TIME TO COMPLETE EVALUATIONS*

GARB BACKLOG AVERAGE AGE OF OPEN CRs AVERAGE TIME TO COMPLETE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

~~..

I*..... ':>*:m1 ?' I

  • : :.. :*. *..Y;. :.......

s CORRECTIVE ACTION (CRCA)

EXTENSION REQUESTS CORRECTIVE ACTION SCHEDULE I LEVEL 11 LEVEL 2 QUALITY OF EVALUATIONS ANALYSIS/CORRECTIVE ACTIONS OVERALL

~.

..... ~

.... ~":.-:'.:::

GREEN= EXCELLENCE YELLOW= MEETS STANDARD RED = NEEDS IMPROVEMENT NOTE: Engineering figures are not included in this performance indicator.

  • Criteria changed in May.

Responsible Manager: M. Marano Report Date : 5/9/96

SALEM ENGINEERING CORRECTIVE ACTION PROCESS JAN I FEB I MAR APR NEW CRs AVERAGE TIME TO COMPLETE EVALUATIONS*

CARB BACKLOG AVERAGE AGE OF OPEN CRs AVERAGE TIME TO COMPLETE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS GREEN= EXCELLENCE 684 SALEM ENGINEERING CORRECTIVE ACTION PROCESS APRIL 281 407 374 COMPLETION OF SCHEDULED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FOR MONTH CORRECTIVE ACTION (CRCA)

EXTENSION REQUESTS CORRECTIVE ACTION SCHEDULE OVERALL YELLOW= MEETS STANDARD RED= NEEDS IMPROVEMENT NOTE: Previous month trends are not currently available, this is due to the fact that this is the first time for an overall Engineering performance chart (previously broken down by department only).

  • Criteria changed in May.

Responsible Manager: M. Marano Report Date 516196

REVIEW PROCESSES

  • Corrective Action Review Board
  • Station Oversight Review Committee
  • Restart Plan Screening Committee
  • Management Review Committee

NEXT STEPS

NEXT STEPS

  • Restart Readiness Assessments

- System Readiness Assessments

- Operational Readiness assessments

- Integrated Readiness Assessment

- Management Review Committee Readiness Assessment

  • Independent Oversight
  • Restart Recommendation

NEXT STEPS

  • Major activities prior to startup

-Core Load

- Satisfy Mode 5 requirements

-- Restart Assessment Team Inspection (RATI)

- Heat up & Pressurize plant - evaluate plant I outage work

- Surveillances I technical specification testing

- Hot standby performance testing

- NRC agreement to enter Mode 2

- Start up unit

- Power Ascension Program

  • ". ~

NEXT STEPS POWER ASCENSION PROGRAM

POWER ASCENSION PROGRAM

  • Purpose - Safe, Controlled, Deliberate Startup
  • Scope

- Startup Power Ascension Organization

- Special Test Preparation and Planning Flow Chart

- Assessment Holdpoints

- Power Ascension Plateaus

- Startup and Power Ascension Schedule

POWER ASCENSION PROGRAM Startup Power Ascension Organization I

Startup Test Manager Shift SIU Test Engineers

-~

I 1

I Shift Plant Manager Shift Proc.

Rep's Shift Maint.

Rep's Training Rep Shift Outage Coord.'s Director System Engineering I

Shift Eng.

Support Manager I

Engineering Support I

TEST PREPARATION & PLANNING Development Phase Test Plan Station Operations Review Committee review Special Tests Planning Phase Test Equipment Contingency Planning Acceptance Criteria Pre-Test Breifing I Training Implementation Shift Breifing Perform Tests Review Res u Its

POWER ASCENSION PROGRAM

  • Assessment Hold Points

- 5% Power Plateau (Mode 1)

- 25°/o Power Plateau

- 35% Power Plateau

- 47°/o Power Plateau

- 75%.Power Plateau

- 90% Power Plateau

POWER ASCENSION PROGRAM Mode Undefined 21 Chrg Pump 405P 22 Chrg Pump 405P 23 Chrg Pump 405P 21 Chrg Pump Flow Test 22 Chrg Pump >"low Test 21 SI Pump 405P 22 SI Pump 405P 21 SI Pump Flow Test 22 SI Pump Flow Test SI l'ccumulator Dumps ECCS ti-Head CL Flow l>dJ ECCS Int-Head CL Flow Mj ECCS Int-Head 1-L Flow Mj 21 R~ Pump 405P 22 R~ Pump 405P 21 CS Pump 405P 22 CS Pump 405P 21 CS Pump Full Flow Test 22 CS Pump Full Flow Test CS System Auto l'ctuation 21 Cmpnt Clng Pump 405P 22 Cmpnt Clng Pump 405P 23 Cmpnt Clng Pump 405P Modes Fuel Load Mode5 Boric Acid MIU Control Primary Water MIU Control VCT Level Control Steam DulJ1l Control RVLIS Mkl4.oop Ch Cal Ve rlf RVLIS/RCP Cormlnations PBV Flow Balance CW Pu171'/Sl15te m Functlonal CWTrav Screen Functional CW Bearing Lube Functional Manual ESF Act - SI Manual ESF Act - CISA Manual ESF Act - CISB 2A DG/Bus Mode Op Test 28 DG/Bus Mode Op Test 2C DG/Bus Mode Op Test Mode4 RVLIS/RCP Corminations Ltdwn HX Tel11"'rature Control Ltdwn Pressure Control Sfty lnj Sys Ck Viv leak Test ESF Load Seq Start Times Mode 3 Pzr Bypass Spray Flow l>dj Plr Pressure Control pzr Level Control Plant Vent Partlculall! Mon Test Plant Vent Iodine Mon Test Plant Vent Noble Gas Mon Test Maln Stm Line N16 Mon Test Aux FW Control Valve, Functional Nuclear Instr (NIS) Calibration Hot Shutdown Panel Functional Control Rod Drop Time Test Main Stm Sl/5 Leak Test Swgr kea (CAV) Air Balance Batt Room Exh (CAV) Functional Fire Da171"'r (CAV) Functional C02 Dal11"'r (CAV) Functional RVLIS/RCP Cormlnations ARPI Baseline Scaling Plr PORV Seat Leak Test Mode2 SGFP Speed Control Tuning Mode 1 Turb Stop Viv Belleville Setting PBV /ij r Row 0 ptirrization Rod Sjieed & Direction Control SGFP Speed Control Tuning ADFCS - Process/Load Swings Turbine Runback Testing SGFP Trip Secondary Plant Pert Monitoring FW Heater Optlrrization Main Turbine Pert Baseline

POWER LEVEL POWER ASCENSION PLATEAUS 100 90 75 70 50 35 25 15 s

0

  • Turbine O/S Tests
  • Sync Turbine
  • Turbine Bellville Washer Setup (7.5% Power)
  • SGFP STP 10% Load Swing Reset NIS Trips (60%Power) 5°/o Level/F cedwater Swing Flux Mapping (47% Power)

Flux Mapping (25% Power)

ADFCS STP 5°/o Le**eVFeedwatcr Swing (15% Power)

SGFP Final Tuning STP (35°0 Power)

SGFP STP 25°/o Load Swing (90°0 Power)

Core Conditioning

  • RCS Flow I\\ lcasurements

( 100° o Power)

ADFCSSTP 5°/o Lc.-el/Fccdwater S""ing (90°ii Power)

Safe, controlled, deliberate startup SGFP STP 40% Load SGFP STP SGFP Trip (Runback tn 60%)

(90° o Power)

..\\IW<"S STI' 5% J,ewl/Feedwatcr Swing

( 100°0 Power)

INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT

INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT*

Purpose:

- Provide day to day oversight of outage activities

- Provide the Chief Nuclear Officer with an independent assessment of restart readiness

  • Methodology: Independent Assessment of :

- Restart Plan Assessments

- Technical Programs Assessments

- System Testing Assessments

-Audits

- Day to Day Oversight

INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT

~..

,~~~UL~,

3~~~t-*~-*1<1r--~-~~~-~w/:::.::-

................oo-Mo>.:

~~~l.

'7/;?"'/H/h">N"'

    • -.,...HHY/,A

-~~.

~//.l'/nn.-.............

,3=b&t\\l'Lft.~lnTH1

  • ASSESSMENT RESULTS

- Operations

- Maintenance

- Engineering

- Plant Support

INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT

  • Nuclear Review Board

Purpose:

Provide advice and counsel to the Chief Nuclear O.fficer on Nuclear Safety and Operational Performance

- Restart activities to date

- Future meetings

. EMERGENCYPREPAREDNESS PROGRAM

  • Program ownership
  • Emergency Responder teams
  • Stakeholder communications
  • Management expectations

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM

~~\\\\Vi14,,

.~~-*-**~1.. 1r*~---~:.

. ~...,... ~/A

~

~#m..-..-n,..,..,........,,

?;*°!/i\\fll°f~r**1*:*1*1;y*I

,.:*o:*=*-*.. i.--

1 I

  • *Expectations for Graded Exercise

- Demonstrate ability to analyze events

- Demonstrate ability to classify the event

- Demonstrate ability to make Protective Action.

Recommendations to the States

- Demonstrate ability to effectively critique the *exercise

I..

-~~~~.VJJ4.,

-~~~

      • 'j'J.fm**-**m*~:.

--~

j.

WH.<</nx-,,,,_.

SUMMARY

~lh<l\\111;~~/'1*'.*lc,l**=1:**1 r::*.-(.;*-.**** *I*** l

  • We see positive results in:

- Fixing the plant for safe I reliable operation

- Fixing the processes to support operations

- Changing the culture to high standards in Human Performance, Self Assessment and Corrective Action

I ill *

.J... *.1.....,

1 ATTACHMENT 3 SALEM FUEL HANDLING BUILDING CFHB) VENTILATION ISSUES The current licensing basis for the FHB system is not well understood and documented.

For example:

a.
b.
c.

d..

Cannot conclude that the current calculations of record *

(associated with Amendment 131) match the current system operational configuration.

The appropriate supply and exhaust fan combination required for operability is unclear.

Not clear that performance of the FHB system is appropriate for building temperatures outside the range of 60-105 F.

Not clear that the FHB system design is able to tolerate a single-failure of any active component. including it's dampers and fans.

2.

Charcoal filter train bypass flow may not be less than the 1% Technical Specification requirement; this concern derives from a question regardi,ng the. adequacy of surveillance testing techniques and from a DEF whose resulution is questionable.

3.

The FHB exhaust fans have high vibration indications.

4.

The auto start feature described in Technical Specifications for the FHB exhaust fans is n9t part of the current.design.

  • 5.

The UFSAR does not match the current design with respect to charcoal heating.

May 24. 1996

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML18102A142&oldid=5001839"