ML20035F483
| ML20035F483 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 04/15/1993 |
| From: | Labarge D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9304210334 | |
| Download: ML20035F483 (50) | |
Text
_
- " % g',
/
UNITED STATES g
I~.
,,(1 NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION I -
~ -
I A ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 I
\\%
~E
'S."... /
April 15, 1993 Docket Nos. 50-327 l
and 50-328 LICENSEE: Tennessee Valley Authority FACILITY:
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 l
SUBJECT:
MEETING OF APRIL 12, 1993 - SEQUOYAH RESTART ISSUES On April 12, 1993, the NRC staff met at the NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland, with representatives of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) management staff to address TVA's assessment and corrective actions related to i
restart of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant. is a list of the I
individuals who attended the meeting and Enclosure 2 is the handout material that was supplied by TVA.
The topics discussed included recent problems, plant status, development of plant restart criteria, performance and evaluation techniques, program enhancements, status of balance of plant work and backlogs, restart assessment and schedule, and TVA Corporate support.
As a result of the meeting and a subsequent telephone conversation with TVA, the following information will be supplied by TVA:
1.
Describe the problems that existed in the early 1980s that subsequently lead to the shutdown of both Sequoyah units from 1985 to 1988.
Describe the degree to which these problems are similar to the problems that currently exist at Sequoyah.
2.
Describe the issues that had not been resolved prior to restart of Sequoyah Units 1 and 2 in 1988.
Describe the basis for delaying resolution until after restart and the current status of resolution of these issues.
Describe the degree to which the delay in resolution of these issues contributed to the recent decline in performance at Sequoyah.
3.
Assess the degree to which the backlog of maintenance work, particularly work associated with the Balance of Plant, has contributed to the recent number of reactor trips and challenges to the safety systems.
Describe steps being taken to reduce this backlog.
4.
Describe the steps that will be taken to more clearly assign responsi-bility and accountability to the site organization.
Describe the steps being taken to identify programs that require modification (e.g.,
programs where fragmented responsibility and a lack of ownership have resulted in ineffective program implementation) in order to improve the performance at Sequoyah.
$o$7
\\
y m
,, n.p,.
PDR sa,
" 55
\\
m.\\
y_
t
- 5.
Describe the criteria and process that will be used to determine what actions must be taken prior to restart (versus those which can be delayed until after restart).
l 6.
Describe the steps taken or planned for self-assessment of site and corporate activities including steps for improving the effectivenes.c u.'
future assessments of material condition and management effectiveness.
Original signed by David E. LaBarge, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate II-4 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i
Enclosures:
1.
Attendance List 2.
TVA Handout l
cc w/ enclosures:
j See next page i
[^i
/1 OFFICE PDII-4/LA PDII-4/P PDI k h DLaBarge;<: as FHebdoh e r 4:
NAME MSanders DATE 4 //f/93 4 /t[/93 4 //f /93 DOCUMENT NAME: g:\\sqn\\apr.mtg. sum i
s j
Distribution
)
T. Murley/F, Miraglia 12-G-18 J. Partlow 12-G-18 S. Varga 14-E-4 G. Lainas 14-H-1 F. Hebdon M. Sanders OGC 15-B-18 E. Jordan MNBB-3302 S. Bajwa 12-E-2 D. Houston ACRS D. Smith 7-D-4 P. Kellogg RII A. Gibson RII l
S. Ebneter RII l
G. Zech 10-H-6 l
V. Nerses i
ACRS (10)
L. Plisco 17-G-21 P. Frederickson Enclosures 1 and 2 Docket File PDR & LPDR SON Reading l
E. Merschoff D. LaBarge
s l1.
cc:
Mr. John B. Waters, Chairman County Judge l
Tennessee Valley Authority Hamilton County Courthouse i
ET 12A Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402 400 West Summit Hill Drive Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 Regional Administrator U.S.N.R.C. Region II Mr. J. R. Bynum, Vice President 101 Marietta Street, N.W.
Nuclear Operations Suite 2900 3B Lookout Place Atlanta, Georgia 30323 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801 Mr. William E. Holland Senior Resident Inspector Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Mr. M. J. Burzynski, Manager U.S.N.R.C.
Nuclear Licensing and Regulatory Affairs 2600 Igou Ferry Road Tennessee Valley Authority Soddy Daisy, Tennessee 37379 5B Lookout Place l
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801 Dr. Mark 0. Medford, Vice President Nuclear Assurance, Licensing & Fuels Mr. Jack Wilson, Vice President Tennessee Valley Authority l
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant 3B Lookout Place Tennessee Valley Authority 1101 Market Street P.O. Box 2000 Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801 Soddy Daisy, Tennessee 37379 TVA Representative Tennessee Valley Authority 11921 Rockville Pike Suite 402 Rockville, Maryland 20852 Ms. Marci Cooper, Site Licensing Manager Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Tennessee Valley Authority P.O. Box 2000 Soddy Daisy, Tennessee 37379 Mr. Michael H. Mobley, Director Division of Radiological Health 3rd Floor, L and C Annex 401 Church Street Nashville, Tennessee 37243-1532 General Counsel Tennessee Valley Authority ET llH 400 West Summit Hill Drive Knoxville, Tennessee 37902
t 4
i 3
ENCLOSURE 1 l
I ATTENDANCE LIST l
l APRIL 12. 1993 MEETING i
5 NRC TVA T. Ross M. McKnight
(
S. Bajwa C. Eckl l
D. Houston J. Baumstark i
D. Smith T. Flippo L. Plisco P. Trudel P. Kellogg M. Cooper
[
{
E. Merschoff J. Ward t
A. Gibson R. Fenech j
I i
V. Nerses M. Medford D. LaBarge J. Bynum F. Hebdon R. Eytchison G. Lainas
- 0. Kingsley, Jr.
S. Varga T. McGrath J. Partlow R. Huston S. Ebneter 1
T. Murley J. Taylor G. Zech 4
1 4.
e
l.
L Z
u Z
ig H
i y
l5 M
l Q
m w
l ~"H@
m m
! *e p Hwm 3
Y H
g M
h l
S
?"
4 00 4J
! 4 s
y HV M*
' s+
wL
!C
! z%$
v u
M Z
i Z
O en
i a
NRC/TVA MEETING APRIL 12, 1993 J
AGENDA I. OPENING REMARKS 0.D. KINGSLEY SQN START-UP CRITERIA 1
l II. SQN SITE ACTIONS INTRODUCTION R.A. FENECH SQN PERFORMANCE AND RESTART EVALUATIONS R.A. FENECH CAL ISSUES J.N. WARD TECHNICAL PROGRAMS M.A. COOPER OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE J.S. BAUMSTARK BALANCE OF PLANT P.G..TRUDEL BACKLOGS (PAST/PRESENT)
P.G. TRUDEL III. RESTART ASSESSMENTS R.A. FENECH HARDWARE PROGRAMS OPERATIONS PERSONNEL RESTART IV. RESTART SCHEDULE R.A. FENECH V. CORPORATE SUPPORT M.0. MEDFORD RESOURCE ALLOCATION CORPORATE OVERSIGHT VI. CONCLUDING REMARKS 0.D. KINGSLEY j
l 1
_y.
._.m...yv,_..c.
,,y
1
).
j i
M M
i s
J l
1 i
L i
M i
[,
h l
b l
O a
EVALUATION AND CORRECTIVE ACTION FOR IMMEDIATE PROBLEM
- EROSION / CORROSION
- ELECTRICAL SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN
-IDENTIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL l
DEFICIENCIES l
- CORRECTIVE ACTIONS l
i I
ESSENTIAL PROGRAMS l
- SITE ASSESSMENT
-INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT l
l l
ia
SEQUOYAH STARTUP CRITERIA MANAGEMENT AND PERSONNEL
- CO WPREHENSIVE REVIEW i
- CLARIFICATION OF CORPORATE ROLE ESSENTIAL MAINTENANCE REVIEW SECONDARY PLANT
- EVALUATION
- WA;LKDOWNS
-BACKLOG
- QUALITY ASSURANCE 4
WETHODS TO STATUS AND CLOSE OUT l
RESTART ~ BASED ON SQN BEING READY 1
l-3
w>
4 a
h 9
e Z
O b.
i U
<ds ll d,
r i
b.
8<
O' 1
,.w.
.--n-
-.--..-.r.
INTRODUCTI N EXTENSIVE E/C PROGRAM RECOVERY AND UPGRADE UTILIZING INDEPENDENT INDUSTRY REVIEWS SCOPE EXPANDED BASED ON E/C LESSONS LEARNED AND PLANT EVENTS CRITICAL SELF-ASSESSMENT BASED ON REVIEW OF SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND MULTIPLE INPUT SOURCES STRENGTIIS AND WEAKNESSES EXIST - KEY FOCUS AREAS a
IDENTIFIED - ACCELERATED IMPROVEMENT NEEDED OBJECTIVE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS AND INDEPENDENT a
ASSESSMENTS ESTABLISHED I
11-2
)
l E
T E
C N
N E
E A
E M
R C
N V
E E
I E
N T
G W
T C
M A
G N E
N S
N I
A E
A R
R A
E I
S I
S D
M R
G M
T A
O O
E L
D I
E E E C
R P
V T T
E l
S T
T l
U A A Y
P I
I l
l I
I A
U U L
T S
N M
i I
E S
F S
C G N E C
Q Q N
O R
E I
T E E M
O K
E F
S O
M T
T C
N F
R P
G I
C D D I
RN E E S
A E
A A
N C
A W
N V E
R R
N N O
R F
U A
L O
I I
I I
D OO FI R T M
E R
E T R A
O G
N S
I Y
A O
A O
3 E
E L
K T
S I
l F
A N
S U
l S
N C
R E
O O
E I
I P
R T
A V E
L I
T R
t R
S E
C E
L i
D E
N V
E O
R S
R E L T
C U
/
IA S
E L D
A
/
E T
O N V O N S
S R
O L
A R M
O K P
E I
I AV P
E T E
C C
S R
E O
P M
N T
E I
I S
E R
R A
3 O
l I
Y C
l I
S YE C F E
X
- C S
I I
E O
S U
MAR Q
G OR P
E Y
E L
R R
A O
A C
S W
N I
G E
D I
I T
R C
A A
E I
C T
I t
l
,J f
l i
!i I
~
~
SEQUOYAH PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CATEGOltY EXAM P1,ES DIIRECT CAUSES OPEllATIONS PEllFOltMANCE
- ItWST COOLDOWN EVENT
- FAILUllE TO FOLLOW
- DUAL UNIT TitiP PitOCEDUltES
- SWITCilYAltD liitEAKEll
- INADEQUA*'7, COM M AND PitOllLEMS AND CONTitOL
- MISPOSITIONED VALVES
- INADEQUATE LOGKEEPING
- MISPOSITIONED AND TUltNOVEll PilACTICES IIANDSWITCIIES
- INADEQUATE SWITCilYAltD CONTitOLS
- CONFIGUltATION CONTitOL WEAKNESSES I
i
SEQL OhAH PERFORMANCE ROOT CAUSES WANAGEMENT
- MANAGE MENT OVERSIGHT AND FOLLOWUP
- CLEAR DEFINITION OF RESPONSIBILITIES
- RESOURCE UTILIZATION i
i PERSONNEL PERFORMANCE i
k l
4 11 5
~
RESTART PROCESS EVALUATION CRITERIA ESTABLISIIED - NUCLEAR SAFETY, PLANT RELIABILITY, AND OPERATIONAL IMPACT UTILIZED INPUT FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES
- E/C LESSON LEARNED l
- SIP
- MANAGEMENT
- PLANT EVENTS
- EMPLOYEES
- INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL ASSESSMENTS i
DEPARTMENT / OWNER REVIEWS AND ASSESSMENT OF INPUTS s
l MANAGEMENT RESTART REVhsW COMMITTEE REVIEW OF ASSESSMENTS AND INDIVIDUAL ITEMS CONTINUING REVIEW PROCESS FOR RESTART ACTIVITY l
DECISIONS AND CLOSURE i
i s -c, i
RESTART PROCESS EVALUATION CRITERIA ADVERSE INDIVIDUAL OR AGGREGATE IMPACT ON SAFE, RELIABLE OPERATIONS POTENTIAL FOR CAUSING ENTRY INTO SHORT-TERM TECH SPEC ACTION STATEMENTS POTENTIAL FOR CAUSING FREQUENT ENTRY INTO TECH SPEC ACTION STATEMENTS
- - POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANTLY CHALLENGING PLANT / PERSONNEL PERFORMANCE HIGH POTENTIAL TO JEOPARDIZE PLANT RELIABILITY INDIVIDUAL OR AGGREGATE IMPACT ON INDUSTRIAL SAFETY NEED OR BENEFITS FOR WORKING DURING TWO-UNIT OUTAGE 11 7
E/C PROGRAM REVIEW LARGE BORE b
PfPING EVALIJATION-iNSP/MODELING/R&RS SMALL BORE.
UPGRADED PROGRAM LOW TEMP OV EVALUATION & TESTING RESULTS IMPACT ON OTHER Eqn EVENT RESPONSE ROOTCAUSE CAL ISSUES Y
r'
=
- -e;;-
REVIEWS l
i
+
l NUCLEAR SAFET(
SIP OPER. IMPACT r
HARDWARE RELIABILITY l
- MGMNT, m
REVIEWS
^
ITERATIVE " SCRUB" V
EMPLOYE b PRELIM ESTART S EN w
FEEDBAC.
LIST J
\\"
p 4^
\\
w HARDWARE g
NSRB r
PROGRAM / PROCESS \\
OPS PERFORMANCE g
l BACKLOG-m BACKLOG REDUCTION i
l REVIEWS -
SALP DEPARTMENT EVALUATIONS INPO s-LONGER TERM 7
SHORT &
l INTERNAL POST RESTART LONG HRM (SIP) i
' SYSTEM-I DESIGN c'
REVIEWS i
l l
e L
RESTART ACTVT(ES SELECT!ON PROCESS l
\\
?
r,
_ -----_.~._.-- -..,
~
CONFIRNIATORY ACTION ISSLES i
PROBLEM /CAUSES PIPE RUPTURE EVENT
- 10" STEAM EXTRACTION LINE TO UNIT 2 NO. 2 FEEDWATER IIEATER
- VOLTAGE TRANSIENT DUE TO STEAM EFFECTS ON GENERATOR VOIJfAGE REGULATOR CUBICLE
- MANUAL REACTOR TRIP AND UNIT STABILIZATION
- CONTROLLED UNIT 1 SIIUTDOWN PROBLEMS
- IMPROPER EVALUATION OF PREVIOUSIX IDENTIFIED PROBLEM i
- FAILURE TO DOCUMENT IDENTIFIED PROBLEM TO ENSURE CORRECTION
- INSUFFICIENT EXPANSION
- CIIECMATE MODEL INPUT ERROR AND MODELING INADEQUACIES
- WEAK UNDERSTANDING OF PROGRAM /MODELING BASIS i
ROOT CAUSE l
- INSUFFICIENT MANAGEMENT OVERSIGIIT
- WEAK CIIANGE MANAGEMENT
- FRAGMENTED ORGANIZATION / RESPONSIBILITIES i
II-9 q
l
=.
CONFIRMATORY ACTION ISSEES CORRECTIVE ACTIONS OVERVOLTAGE EVALUATION AND TESTING - NO DAMAGE INCURRED AS RESULT OF OVERVOLTAGE RUPTURED EXTRACTION LINE FAILURE ANALYSIS LARGE BORE RECOVERY AND RESUI!rS
- EPRI STRATEGIC PLAN
- COMPLETE REBUILD OF CIIECMATE - MODEL INPUTS, PASS 1 AND 2 INSPECTIONS
- ESTABLISIIED ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
- PARALLEL PRELIMINARY INSPECTIONS AND REPAIR / REPLACEMENTS
- FULL GRID INSPECTIONS
- 243 INSPECTIONS / EVALUATIONS COMPLETE - 24 NOT ACCEPTABLE SMALL BORE EVALUATION AND RESUI!rS
- CIIANGEOUTS ONGOING AND SCIIEDULED AT TIME OF EVENT
- 485 OF 553 INSP/ EVAL COMPLETE - 100 REJECTIONS
- REPLACE ALL TARGET TEES TIIIRD-PARTY REVIEW LONG-TERM PROGRAM
- NEW ORGANIZATION
- USE OF AlfrRAN li-in
~
~
TECHNICAL PROGRAMS PROBLEMS /CAUSES PROBLEMS o
- PROGRAM MATIC WEAKNESSES
- FIRE PROTECTION
- ISI LEAKAGE INSPECTIONS
- E/C ROOT CAUSES o
- RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
- INSUFFICIENT OWNERSHIP
- TOO MANY ORGANIZATIONAL " HAND-OFFS"
- INSUFFICIENT MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT 11-11
~
~
TECHNICAL PROGRAMS CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ORGANIZATION CHANGES o
- INITIATED PRIOR TO E/C EVENT
- AREnS AFFECTED
- E/C, ISI, SERVICE WATER, MIC, BORATED WATER, SECTION XI PUMP & VALVE, REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT, PRESSURE TESTS, CVs, MOVs, APPENDIX J...
ORGANIZATION KEY ELEMENTS o
l
- SITE OWNERSHIP
- CLEARLY DEFINED RESPONSIBILITIES / INTERFACES f
- PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS l
l u.c
~
~
TECHNICAL PROGRAMS
~
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS 4
I i
PROGRA MMATIC IWPROVEMENTS-STATUS o
-SHORT TER W
- CLEARLY DEFINE RESPONSDILITIES/ OBJECTIVES
- ESTABLISH SITE /PROGRA M INTERFACES
- COMPLETE PROGRAM ASSESSMENTS /BASELINING j!
- IMPLE MENT REQUISITE RESTART ACTIONS
- IMPLE MENT TRANSITIONAL PHASE
-LONG TERM (POST RESTART)
- PROCEDURES UPGRADES l
- ESTABLISH CONTINUING TRAINING l
- UTILIZE CONTINUING PERIODIC INDUSTRY l
REVIEWS E
e, i
i
~
OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE ISSUES CHALLENGES o
- CONDUCT OF OPERATIONS
- CONFIGURATION CONTRO.L
- PROCEDURAL COMPLIANCE ROOT CAUSES o
- WEAKNESSES IN EXPECTATIONS / ACCOUNTABILITY
- WORK FORCE CUUfURE i
- PROCEDURE COMPLIANCE NOT A WAY OF LIFE I
l i
l l
i 11-14
~
OPERATIONS CORRECTIVE ACTIONS CONDUCT OF OPERATION
- MANAGEMENT OF CONTROL ROOM ACTIVITIES
- FORMALITY OF COMMUNICATIONS
- ATTENTION TO DETAIL /SELF CHECKING STAR
- COMMUNICATION OF MANAGEMENT EXPECTATIONS
- SHIFT TURNOVER / TRAINING WEEK
- WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
- STAND DOWN 11-15
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS CONFIGERATION CONTROL o
- IV AS PART OF RETURN-TO-SERVICE
-IV LINELP OF El CMODE 4 & 5 SYSTEWS) AND AND U2 ('ALL SYSTEMS)
- MOVE TO CO WPUTER-ASSISTED PROGRAW PROCEDURES o
- RESOLVE ON AN ISSUE-TO-ISSUE BASIS
- REAL TIME PROCEDURES, INC.
l
- MANDATORY vs ENHANCEMENT
- COMPLIANCE BECOMING A WAY OF LIFE i
11-16
RELIABILITY DEFICIENCIES IN THE BOP HAVE o
INCREASINGLY CONTRIBUTED TO UNIT TRANSIENTS AND REACTOR TRIPS 3
l INADEQUATE PRIORITY HAS BEEN PLACED o
l ON BOP MAINTENANCE AND COMPONENT DEFICIENCY RESOLUTION l
l l
11-17
~
BALANCE OF PLANT (BOP)
RELIABILITY 4
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
- BOP RELIABILITY STEDY
- APPROACH l
- WETHODOLOGY
- CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE BACKLOG l
- REVIEWED BACKLOG FOR RELIABILITY l
IWPACT l
- PRIORITIZED RELIABILITY ITEMS AS RESTART
- INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF BOP DESIGN BEING PERFORMED l
l j
ii.is t
e
---e.
- -. ~,..-. - -.. -.-. -__
m.
~
BALANCE OF PLANT (BOP)
RELIABILITY CORRECTIVE ACTIONS (CONT.?
o
- I MPLE ME W RESTART BOP MODIFICATIONS AND CORRECTIVE ; MAINTENANCE
- 16 UNIT 1 DESIGN MODIFICATIONS
- 17 UNIT 2 DESIGN ; MODIFICATIONS
- 10 CO M WON DESIGN MODIFICATIONS
- CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE 1
)
l ii-i9 l
~
~
BALANCE OF PLANT (BOP)
~
RELIABILITY CORRECTIVE ACTIONS (CONT.)
o
- IMPLEMENT POST-RESTART BOP RELIABILITY RECO M WENDATIONS t
- CO WPLETE RC M PROGRA W FOR l
j SECONDARY SYSTEWS j
- POST RESTART PLAN FOR LOWER PRIORITY l
WODIFICATIONS
- REDEFINE WORK PRIORITIZATION l
i l
,,.m
~
~
RESTART BACKLOG STATUS
^
1988 RESTART REMAINING TODAY 250 NRC COMMITMENTS 2 NRC COMMITMENTS 1705 CA DOCUMENTS 24 CA DOCUMENTS 982 ECNs/DCNs 102 ECNs/DCNs 326 CATDs 18 CATDs 34 EMPLOYEE CONCERNS ALL CLOSED 2100 SETPOINT AND SCALING DOCUMENTS 340 SSDs 12000 PIECE PART EVALUATIONS 630 EVALUATIONS FOR REPLACEMENT i
i l
nai
l CURRENT BACKLOGS BACKLOG REVIEWED INDIVIDUALLY AND o
IN AGGREGATE
- MAINTENANCE
- ENGINEERING
- CA DOCUMENTS IMPROVE RELIABILITY AND REDUCE OPERATIONAL o
IVIPACT BASED ON REVIEW PRIORITY LONG-TERM PLAN EVALUATED AND ESTABLISHED o
4 l
Il-22
Maintenance Work Order Backlog Non-Outage Corrective Maintenance 3,000 -
U2 Restart 2,500 -
U1 Restart 2,000 -
U2C3 End
%v[- -
U1 C4. End 1,500 -
7 U2C4 End
'V U1C5 End 1,000 -
M'M
+
500 -
l U2C5 End.
o iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiio iiiiiiiiiiiio ciiiiiiii MAMJ J ASONDJ FNRMJ J ASONDJ FMAMJ J ASONDJ FMAMJ J ASONDJ FMAMJ J ASONDJ FMA 88 l
89 l
90 l
9.1 l
92 l 93 i
4
~-~ --
- ~ ~
- - - - ~ - - ~ ~
w
-a
_-a ua-4 1
i l
l
)
I 1
H Hd 2f M
\\
45 W
i
\\
(f) D s
(11 S
8
$ (f) 4 s
i.
l:
1 i
4
,--.-,,----.-,_._--,---__.----,________,_,,__-.__m_m.
.. - -, _ -, -,,,..m..----,-.my,
RESTART READINESS ASSESSMENTS IIARDWARE
- POST-MODIFICATION TESTING
- POST-MAINTENANCE TESTING PROGRAMS
-INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENTS
- OWNER ASSESSMENT
- QA ASSESSMENT OPERATIONS
- LINE ASSESSMENT
- QA ASSESSMENTS
- RESTART READINESS TEAM REVIEW PERSONNEL 1
- SITE / INDEPENDENT REVIEW TEAM a
l
- QA ASSESSMENTS RESTART
- M ANAGEMENT RESTART REVIEW COMMITTEE REVIEW
- INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT l
l
- NSRil REVIEW i
- QA ASSESSMENTS l
i 111-2
TECHNICAL PROGRAMS REVIEW'
~
INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT APPROACH
- TEA M CO MPOSITION l
- REVIEW PLAN
- MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW SCOPE l
- OPEN ISSUES (BACKLOGS) l
- SWITCHYARD CONTROL i
- CORROSION CONTROL PROGRAMS l
- ASME AND REGULATO;RY PROGRAMS l
-EQ j
- VALVE, P M, EQUIP MENT TRENDING l
- CONTROL OF TEMPORARY REPAIRS
- CHE MISTRY i
111.t I
l
)
=
4o
- m X
O 0
- v M
]
8
_v H
4H k,
i s
i a
GO
- v v
uma man i <
i cm o,
y
==.
M k,
h I
W
- U
!Z w
w a
w w-e-a ewww--ee,---w--rvww-e..w,,.=e.,--war-re-ee-,w w. ww -e.
w--=--unwwwe-m-e m -w+-z--eee--wem----
es-=r-we w-- a
, - - -e-e-e'
RESTART READINESS TEAM
~
RESTART READINESS TEAM 4
o
- VERIFY READINESS OF OPERATIONS TO CONDUCT SAFE AND EFFICIENT REACTOR OPERATIONS i
- ORAL EXAMS
- EVALUATE EACH OPERATING CREW
- CO WPOSED OF SENIOR TVA MANAGERS AND INDUSTRY CONSULTANTS
- SCHEDULED MAY 9-21,1993 C
1 m.s l
~
QUALITY ASSURANCE
~
ASSESSMENTS
)
RECENT ASSESSMENT
- OPERATIONS BASELINE (FALL '92)
ONGOING ASSESSMENTS
- OPERATIONS
- MAINTENANCE RESTART ASSESSMENTS / AUDITS
)
-BACKLOGS
- SI PROGRAM
- TECHNICAL PROGRAMS
- SYSTEM ENGINEERING
- PMT FOLLOW-UP l
- ANNUNCIATOR DISABLEMENT l
- CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM l
L iii.c
EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE SITE / INDEPENDENT REVIEW TEA M
- REVIEW AND IDENTIFY SITE PERSONNEL WEAKNESSES / CAPABILITIES RESTART
- OPERATIONS AND OTHER DEPARTMENT FIRST LINE SUPERVISOR REVIEWS
- IDENTIFY NEED FOR CHANGES 1
i POST RESTART j
- ALL SITE ORGANIZATIONS l
- LONGER TERM STRENGTHENING OF SITE i
1 III-7
4
)
I l
i i
P D h
IEEE H
ased l
N
=
1 1
P i i
NH 1
T U
1 v
s i
m r,
1 i
4 b
i 1
~
RESTART SCHEDULE
~
STATUS RESTART ACTIVITIES REVIEW ONGOING o
ENIT 2 RESTART SCHEDULE - JUNE 15,1993 o
UNIT 1 RESTART SCHEDULE - JULY 1,1993 o
i l
l na l
~
i RESTART SCHEDULE
~
REGULATORY INTERFACE APitIL
- NRC/TVA STATUS MEETING (4/12/93)
- NRC INSPECTION PLAN ESTAllLISIIED (4/16/93)
- NRC E/C INSPECTIONS (4/5-9 AND 4/19-23)
MAY
- TVA SUllMITTAL - RESTART PLAN, STATUS AND SCIIEDULE (5/3/93)
- NRC INSPECTIONS (COMPLETED llY 5/21/93)
- TECllNICAL PROGRAMS
- llALANCE OF PLANT
- llACKLOGS
- OPERATIONS i
- NRC/TVA STATUS MEETING (5/21/93)
JUNE
- TVA SUllMITTAL - CLOSURE WITil REMAINING FIELD IMPLEMENTATION (6/I/93)
- NRC/TVA RESTART MEls!'ING (FIRST WEEK OF JUNE)
- NRC CLOSEOUT INSPECTIONS (6/7-11)
- UNIT 2 GEN SYNC - JUNE 15,1993 4
I Y-3 i
I
n 4
W M
CA4 4
h I
T 4i P )
i i
<d o
g l
C i
I
,,.,,,,,-------,,-.c_
SEQL OYAH NUCLEAR PLANT
~
~
RESOURCE EXPENDITURE SINCE RESTART (IN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS) 4 FY89 FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93*
O&M 157
'23 116 145 130 RECOVERY / CAPITAL 116 129 95 83 45 TOTAL 273 252 211 228 175 1
- BUDGETED AMOUNT j
i i
V -2 l
ASSkSS MENT OF CORPORATE OVERSIGH'T CORPORATE OVERSIGHT HAS NOT BEEN EFFECTIVE l
IN PREVENTING THE PROBLEMS AT SEQUOYAH TECHNICAL AND PERFORMANCE PROBLEMS HAVE NOT o
ALWAYS BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THE PAST, ALTHOUGH CURRENT ISSUES WERE SUBSTANTIALLY IDENTIFIED I
4 BY MID-1992 4
l IDENTIFIED ISSUES HAVE NOT BEEN READILY o
ACCEPTED AND RESOLVED BY SQN AND CORPORATE HAS BEEN INEFFECTIVE AT ESCALATING PROBLEMS l
FURTHER l
l l
j v.3 l
ASSESSMENT OF CORPORATE OVERSIGIIT CAUSES OF OVERSIGHT PROBLE MS o
- LACK OF CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF OVERSIGHT ROLE BY CORPORATE
- RELUCTANCE TO PURSUE ISSUES IF REJECTED
- BY SITE
- TENDENCY TO SHIFT TO SUPPORT ROLE FOR AREAS ACCEPTED BY SITE
- SELF ASSESS WENT NOT UTILIZED AS l
WANAGE MENT TOOL l
l v.4
SSES5ME5 EOF CORPORATN OVERSEGHT CAUSES OF OVERSIGHT PROBLEMS (CONT.?
o
- LACK OF OWNERSHIP OF ISSUES BY SQN
- RELL CTANCE TO ACCEPT FL NDA MENTAL OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND ACT ON THEM
- TENDENCY TO REQUEST MORE FREQUENT CORPORATE SUPPORT FOR LINE TASKS i
- FAILURE OF SQN TO ACCEPT AND ACT ON CO MPREHENSIVE JUNE 1992 ASSESSMENT REPORT l
l l
V -5
ASSESSMENT OF CORPORATE OVERSIGHT SOLUTIONS o
- REORGANIZE CORPORATE RESOURCES TO ELI WINATE UNNECESSARY HAND-OFFS i
AND PROVIDE FURTHER MANAGE;WENT l
DIRECTION ON EXPECTATIONS FOR OVERSIGHT FUNCTION
- SQN SITE ACCEPTANCE OF OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND CO;WPREHENSIVE ACTION TO RESOLVE ISSUES l
- SITE IWPROVEMENT PLAN HAS INCORPORATED l
JUNE 1992 REPOlRT ELEMENTS l
- WILLINGNESS OF SQN TO ACCEPT OUTSIDE CRITICISM OF RESTART PLANS AND l
LONG-TER;W CORRECTIVE ACTIONS l
v -r,
CONCLUDING REMARKS
~
o THOROUGH REVIEW OF KEY AREAS
- MANAGEMENT AND PERSONNEL
- DESIGN AND HARDWARE
- MAINTENANCE
- PROGRAMS o
CONFIRMATION OF IMPLEMENTATION AND CLOSURE t
i l
VI-I
-