ML20058C770
| ML20058C770 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 11/23/1993 |
| From: | Kokajko L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | NRC |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9312020568 | |
| Download: ML20058C770 (61) | |
Text
.
November 23, 1993 P
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Public Document Room FROM:
LawrenceE.Kokajko/
Senior Project Manaher, South Texas Project NRR/DRPW/PDIV-2
SUBJECT:
Docket Files for South Texas Project - Restart Panel i
Material (Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499)
As a result of recent problems at the South Texas Project, both units were -
l shut down for an extended period of time. The NRC issued a confirmatory action letter, with supplements, to outline the staff's concerns with respect to the resumption of operation. The NRC staff entered NRC Manual Chapter 0350, a process by which the NRC staff, through a Restart Panel, will follow the activities of the plant and will authorize restart after an assessment of r
the licensee's operational ability.
In this process, the NRC staff is required to place certain documents on the l
docket and in the public document room, including the local public document i
room. The enclosed material represents meeting minutes and other records of the South Texas Project Restart Panel that I would like placed on the docket and in the public document room, including the local public document room.
This material does not represent all the material concerning the recent activities at South Texas Project. Many documents are already publicly available (e.g., licensee's submittals, NRC correspondence, NRC inspection reports, etc.), which may be obtained after a routine search of the records and files. The material provided herein represents material that would normally not be obtainable through any routine means.
Please place this material under " South Texas Project Restart Panel Activities," in order to clearly denote its contents.
I also note that additional information will be forthcoming over the next few months either through this office or Region IV.
I appreciate your assistance in the manner.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 504-1309 or e-mail " LEK."
I l
9312O20568 931123 DR ADOCK 05000498 PDR
i STP REVIEW PANEL CHARTER i
PURPOSE The purpose of the STP Review Panel is to:
- Assure consistent approach to issues being identified at South Texas Project and attempt to reach an agency consensus and united approach to addressing the problems at South Texas Project.
- Assure that the followup on safety significant issues are being properly coordinated and scheduled.
- Schedule significant meetings and inspections.
- Assure that the views and concerns of different NRC offices are properly addressed.
- Assure proper coordination for the followup of issues that are identified by the Diagnostic Evaluation Team (DET) inspection.
MEETING FREQUENCY AND ATTENDANCE The STP Review Panel will be convened approximately weekly through the Diagnostic Evaluation Team assessment period.
The Panel will be composed of the following members:
Bill Seach, Director, DRP - Panel Chairman Art Howell, Deputy Director, DRS Dwight Chamberlain, Deputy Director, DRSS Marty Virgilio, Assistant Director for Region IV & V Reactors, NRR NOTE: Panel members may designate appropriate substitutes. NRR attendance may be via telecon.
Minutes for each meeting will be the responsibility of the DRP Section Chief responsible for South Texas Project.
DURATION OF THE PANEL i
The duration of the STP Review Panel will be af the discretion of the Region IV Regional Administrator.
+
STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - FEBRUARY 25. 1993 ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES The Review Panel determined that it would be primarily a coordinating body to focus Region IV inspection resources over the next several months.
Administrative issues were resolved toward the end of the meeting.
The Review Panel would meet approximately once each week until the Diagnostic was completed, with the members from NRR attending via telephone. The next meeting was decided to be March 9,1993, sometime in the morning; this would correspond with another meeting in the Region and permit NRR to attend.
The Diagnostic point-of-contact will be Bill Beach.
He should establish contact with the DET leader daily during the actual inspection, in order to track issues and team progress.
The Resident Inspectors should plan to De passive members of the DET's daily meetings in order to remain cognizant of DET and plant issues.
REGULATORY ISSUES After considerable discussion on the manner that current issues, special inspections, and scheduled and unscheduled enforcement conferences should be dispositioned; the following represents the plan for dispositioning current issues:
IR No Issues Planned Disposition 92-17 TS 3.0.3 Event-Failure to Initiate an SPR Enf Conf; Mar 8 93-03, 8 Examples of Inadequate Self-verification Enf Conf; Mar 8 92-29, 2 URIs on EDG Inoperability Link w/TDAFW issue 92-32 92-35 I URI on Several Examples of Inadequate C/A Rewrite; 2 Level IV's OSTI I URI on Inappropriate Closure of SPR (Alleg)
Resolve in Future I Vio on Fail to Follow Procedures (RRA)
Level IV I Vio on fail to follow Procedures (Fire)
Level IV 93-??
Special Inspection on AIT F/U (Inoperable Future Enf Conf TDAFW) Coupled w/EDG Inoperability Identified as URIs in 93-03 93-06 Special Inspection on:
Future Enf Conf Corrective Action Future Enf Conf
-i i
93-07 AIT-No Regulatory Issues Addressed DTHER ISSUES Solid State Protection System Fuse Problems DRP Action 1
=
l Security Concerns Nothing Specific for DRSS at Present Toxic Gas Monitors DRS Action in a Scheduled Core Mod Station Lubrication DRS/DRP Issue After Comp of DET I
i i
f r
i I
i i
1
STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING MINtlTES - MARCH 9. 1993 ATTENDEES B. Beach. Director, DRP T. Stetka, Chief, Projects Section D
- 5. Black, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR R. Schaaf, Project Engineer, NRR I. Barnes, Technical Assistant, DRS T. Westerman, Chief, Engineering Section. DRS J. Callan, Director, DRSS
- M. Virgilio, Assistant Director. Region IV & V Reactors, NRR
- B. Reckley, Acting Project Manager, NRR
- By Telecon.
PANEL SUBJECTS l
- The panel reviewed and modified it's proposed CHARTER.
- Tom Westerman provided an update on the pending MOV enforcement issue.
It was reported that the inspection report will be in DRAFT form for review by Friday, March 12. Tom stated that the problem identified by the inspection appears to be caused by weak engineering support.
- Bill Beach briefed NRR on the results of the enforcement conferences that were conducted on March 8.
- Tom Stetka provided a briefing on the fuse sizing issue that affected the operability of the SSPS.
This issue is being pursued by the SRI as a special inspection. NRR cuestioned whether the inspection included a review of previous notifications to the industry by the NRC on similar issues.
The SRI will be notified to be sure that this area is ' addressed.
NRR will supply a list of these NRC notifications to the region.
- Ian Barnes provided a briefing on the S/G manway and handhole leakage / stud l
inspection followuo.
DRS will centinue to followup the issue of stud growth as the reason for this growth is not understood.
In addition. it was noted that in the spring 1991, a Service Request (SR) was written to check on the observation of baron crystals on a manway. This original SR i
was voided and a new SR. with a low priority, was written so that the check could be coordinated with planned EDDY current inspections during IRE 04 (the immediate past outage).
However, when no EDDY current testing was done during this outage, the manways were apparently not checked.
Subsequent inspections did not identify the boron crystal issue until it was identified during the present outage. This issue appears to involve both corrective action and maintenance issues.
- Bill Reckley briefed the panel on the results of his briefing of Co :missioner Curtiss for his scheduled STP visit.
The Commissioner had three comments:
1
o A correlation of the departure of Goldberg with the entrance of Hall and the declining performance of the plant.
o The maintenance backlog issue. How large is the backlog, what is the trend, and how long will it take STP to work off the backlog?
(These questions will be forwarded to the licensee so that they are prepared to answer these questions.)
Responsibility of the offsite review group. What were they doing with' o
respect to the current station problems? Are they aggressive or are they just following their CHARTER?
- The statier, lubrication issue was again mentioned.
This issue will be followed up after the DET inspection.
- It was mentioned that the DET briefing by the region was scheduled for 8:30 am. Thursday, Maren 11, in HQ.
- The next STP Review Panel is scheduled for 9:00 am. Thursday, March 18.
- w-STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 18, 1993
~;
ATTENDEES B. Beach, Director, DRP i
T. Stetka, Chief, Projects Section D
[
G. Sanborn, Enforcement Officer A. Howell, Deputy Director, DRS J. Callan, Director, DRSS i
- M. Virgilio, Assistant Director, Region IV & V Reactors, NRR
- By Telecon.
PANEL SUBJECTS l
- The panel discussed the recently revised NRC Manual Chapter 0350 regarding i
~
plant restart approval. The discussion centered around whether STP was at the point that the requirements of this MC need to be implemented.
It was decided that the implementation of this MC is not needed at this time.
However, it was felt that if more problems were to occur at the site, that the need to implement these requirements would be reconsidered. This issue will be addressed again at the next panel meeting.
- The enforcement conference for the MOV issues (IR 93-08), sche 6tled for next Thursday, March 25. was discussed.
It was stated that the preliminary assessment will be completed today and sent to the conference attendees.
It was also stated that NRR will most probably participate in the conference by telephone.
4
- An escalated enforcement case was opened for the AIT followup special inspection that was completed on March 12.
The enforcement conference for this action will be scheduled for Thursday. April 15, in the afternoon.
- The special inspection regarding the fute sizing issue for the SSPS power supplies had an exit conducted on Wednesday, March 10.
However, due the request from NRR (that was discussed in the March 9 Panel Meeting) to have the licensee review their activities for responding to NRC generic communications regarding fuse sizing (i.e., GLs and Ins) and to include this information as a part of the inspection, the inspection period was l
extended.
The final exit for this inspection will be conducted this week i
and the report issued shortly thereafter.
It is expected that this issue will become an escalated enforcement issue.
- Art Howell provided a briefing on the in progress special inspection of the licensee's SG manway and handhole activities. The identification of leakage from manways was apparently initially identified back in 1985 and was continuously identified thereafter.
The results, however, were int'onsistent in that one inspection would identify a leak whereas a followup inspection would not identify a leak in the same area and no work had been performed to fix the leak.
The first time that an assessment of this leakage was performed was in September 1990 even though their program required an assessment each time leakage was identified.
This assessment i
i I
stated that the leakage was not a problem.
A Service Request (SR) to repair the problem was written in 1991, but this SR was subsequently cancelled and a new SR written.
During the current outage they replaced 6 studs and 4 nuts. While the licensee apparently has a good program to detect and correct these types of occurrences, they apparently have not properly implemented the program.
It was agreed by.the panel that this issue would be handled as a Deviation to the program identified by the GL and that a followup management meeting with the licensee will be held.
At i
this meeting the licensee will be requested to address how they handle generic issues, especially those identified to them by the NRC.
- Bill Beach provided information regarding Commissioner Curtiss's visit of March 12. The commissioner was apparently disappointed with the plant's performance and told the licensee that they may be placed on the NRC's problem plant list.
- Bill Beach also discussed the DET briefing that was conducted last week (March II).
He stated that security issues were discussed, especially the fact that excessive compensatory measures have to be taken due to equipment failures.
- The next STP Review Panel is scheduled for 3:00 pm, Thursday, March 25.
{
I T
J b
7 4
s STP REVIEW PANEL f
MEETING NOTES - MARCH 29. 1993 ATTENDEES t
B. Beach, Director, DRP t
A. Howell, Deputy Director, DRS i
D. Chamberlain, Deputy Director, DRSS G. Sanborn, Enforcement Officer M. Satorius, Project Engineer, Project Section D C. Hackney, State Liaison Officer
- M. Virgilio, Assistant Director, Region IV & V Reactors, NRR
- S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR
- B. Reckley, Project Manager, NRR i
PANEL SUBJECTS Current Plant Status was discussed, including recent issues concerning EDG 22 problems with trips on the cooldown cycle, adequacy of outage maintenance, and an apparent valid failure concerning a problem with the attachment studs for the fuel injector pump for the SL cylinder sharing and rendering the EDG out-of-service.
j The enforcement conference for the MOV issues was discussed. The message that will result from this action may not be of sufficient strength to accomplish the goal of conveying to the licensee that their corrective action program needs significant improvement.
Future identified Criterion XVI issues with the licensee will need to be umbrella'ed with this enforcement action.
The AIT followup inspection was discussed. This inspection had I
identified ten apparent violations, with three having the potential for escalated enforcement. The Panel decided that the appropriate manner to disposition the large number wold be to direct the licensee in the cover letter which violations would be considered the primary focus point of the enforcement conference.
In addition, a number of Criterion V issues could probably be grouped into one violation. The enforcement conference is being scheduled for April 16, 1993, with the report to be issued by April 6 or 7.
The special inspection regarding the fuse sizing issues was discussed.
There appeared to be some confusion within the Panel concerning the status of the report.
The last Panel meeting had indicated that further review of generic communications was needed in order to complete the inspection. This review was completed, the exit conducted, and the inspection completed on March 17, 1993.
The report needs to be issued i
ASAP, and an enforcement action number assigned. DRP projects that the
. report will be issued during the week of March 29.
Art Howell briefed the Panel on the status of the steam generator manway stud elongation issue. Although a number of issues were identified, it appears that one non-escalated boric acid program implementation-
t t
violation will be cited. Concerning this issue, there were seven examples of failures to follow procedures,; however, DRS has no lingering safety questions or concerns. A concern for future consideration was linked to the fuse issue, in that the licensee's response to generic communications appears to be weak.
Art Howell also briefed the Panel on the status of the MOV followup i
inspection that ws conducted last week to investigate two allegations.
The first concerned an issue identified during the OSTI regarding the voidance of an SPR that addressed inadequate MOV corrective maintenance procedures. The inspectors determined that specific work instructions were used in lieu of maintenance procedures and that these instructions adequate; however, little corrective actions were initiated to determine root causes of failures and the licensee is generally conducting only symptomatic repairs. The second allegation consisted of a'MOVATS contractor identifying MOV test anomalies and reporting these to the licensee.
The inspectors determined that the licensee's corrective action process appeared to successfully address the concerns of the alleger and resolve the issue.
A short discussion was held on the upcoming enforcement discretion conference call concerning the licensee's digital rod position indication system and rod control system problems.
A discussion was conducted on the adequacy of the Panel addressing all the bases within MC 0350.
Based on a discussion between Jack Roe of NRR and the Regional Administrator, Region IV's position that the MC 0350 procedure would not be formally entered was sustained. The Panel reviewed the requirements of the MC and determined that the actions of the Oversight Panel were accomplishing the intent of the MC. An attachment that addresses this review are attached to these minutes.
The topics to be addressed at the STP CAL public meeting was discussed.
The Panel's consensus was that the complete agenda of topics would not be established until the actual meeting date was determined.
This decision was based upon the fact that the number of issues continues to be dynamic, and as the date of the meeting continues to be extended, due to licensee's problems with issue resolution and new issue identification, new concerns are presented that should be addressed at the public meeting. The earliest projected date for the public meeting is April 9,1993.
The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, April 6, 1993, while Bill Beach is at Headquarters, with Region IV participating via Telecon.
l i
i
STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - MARCH 29, 1993 ATTENDEES B. Beach, Director, DRP A. Howell, Deputy Director, DRS D. Chamberlain, Deputy Director, DRSS G. Sanborn, Enforcement Officer V Satorius, Project Engineer, Project Section D C. Hackney, State Liaison Officer
- M. Virgilio, Assistant Director, Region IV & V Reactors, NRR
- S.
Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR
- B. Reckley, Projet,t Manager, NRR PANEL SUBJECTS Current Plant Status was discussed, including recent issues concerning EDG 22 problems with trips on the cooldown cycle, adequacy of outage maintenance, and an apparent valid failure concerning a problem with the attachment studs for the fuel injector pump for the SL cylinder shearing and rendering the EDG out-of-service.
The enforcement conference for the MOV issues was discussed. The message that will result from this action may not be of sufficient strength to accomplish the cical of conveying to the licenses that their corrective action program needs significant improvement. Future identified Criterion XVI issues with the licensee will need to be umbrella'ed with this enforcement action.
The AIT followup inspection was discussed. This inspection had identified ten apparent violations, with three having the potential for escalated enforcement. The Panel decided that the appropriate manner to disposition the large number would be to direct the licensee in the cover letter which violations would be considered the primary focus point of the enforcement conference.
In addition, a number of Criterion V issues could probably be grouped into one violation. The enforcement conference is being scheduled for April 16, 1993, with the report to be issued by April 6 or 7.
The special inspection regarding the fuse sizing issues was discussed.
There appeared to be some confusion within the Panel concerning the status of the report. The last Panel meeting had indicated that further review of generic comunications was needed in order to complete the inspection.
This review was completed, the exit conducted, and the inspection completed on March 17, 1993. The report needs to be issued ASAP, and an enforcement action number assigned. DRP projects that the report will be issued during the week of March 29.
Art Howell briefed the Panel on the status of the steam generator manway stud elongation issue. Although a number of issues were identified, it appears that one non-escalated boric acid program implementation
~..
violation will be cited. Concerning this issue, there were seven examples of failures to follow procedures,; however, DRS has no lingering safety questions or concerns. A concern for future consideration was linked to the fuse issue, in that the licensee's response to generic communications appears to be weak.
l Art Howell also briefed the Panel on the status of the MOV followup i
inspection that was conducted last week to investigate two allegations.
The first concerned an issue identified during the.0STI regarding_the voidance of an SPR that addressed inadequate MOV corrective maintenance l
procedures. The inspectors determined that specific work instructions i
I were used in lieu of maintenance procedures and that these instructions were adequate; however, little corrective actions were initiated to determine root causes of failures and the licensee is generally conducting only symptomatic repairs. The second allegation consisted of a M0 VATS contractor identifying MOV test anomalies and reporting these to the licensee. The inspectors determined that the licensee's corrective action process appeared to successfully address the concerns of the alleger and resolve the issue.
A short discussion was held on the upcoming enforcement discretion conference call concerning the licensee's digital rod position indication system and rod control system problems.
A discussion was conducted on the adequacy of the Panel addressing all
[
the bases within MC 0350. Based on a discussion between Jack Roe of NRR j
and the Regional Administrator, Region IV's position that the MC 0350 procedure would not be formally entered was sustained. The Panel reviewed the requirements of the MC and determined that the actions of the Oversight Panel were accomplishing the intent of the MC. An attachment that addresses this review are attached to these minutes.
.l The topics to be addressed at the STP CAL public meeting was' discussed.
The Panel's consensus was that the complete agenda of topics would not be established until the actual meeting date was determined. This decision was based upon the fact that the number of issues continues to be dynamic, and as the date of the meeting continues to be extended, due to licensee's problems with issue resolution and new issue identification, new concerns are presented that should bi addressed at the public meeting. The earliest projected date for the public meeting t
is April 9, 1993.
The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, April 6,1993, while Bill Beach is at Headquarters, with Region IV participating via Telecon.
'f I
f
STP REVIEW PANEL MANUAL CHAPTER 0350 CONSIDERATIONS BACKGROUND Following the shutdown of both STP units in early February 1993 due to TDAFWP overspeed trip events, Region IV established an iTP Oversight Review Panel to monitor the status of the licensee's efforts to correct the identified problems, address the requirements of the confirmatory action letter (CAL),
and plan inspection resources to follow up on issue. at the station. Because of the similarities to the requirements of MC 0350, this discussion will establish the actions taken to provide NRC oversigh'..
A review of MC 0350 has indicated that the actions taken and planned for the STP Review Panel will fulfill the intent of the Manual Chapter.
MC 0350 ACTIONS VERSUS THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE REVIEW PANEL l.
MC 0350, Section 04.01a, " Restart Panel," outlines the responsibilities and the authority of the Regional Administrator. The two major issue within this portion of the MC that have been addressed by the Review Panel are the CAL that was issued following the TDAFWP trips, and the establishment of the chartered Review Panel to provide oversight.
2.
Section 06.01a outlines the panel membership that is typically established and the recommendation that the panel normally provided their responsibilities in writing. The STP Oversight Review Panel has accomplished both of these recommendations, in that the Panel membership closely matches the recommendations in the MC and the Panel's Charter provides the written expectations and responsibilities.
3.
Section 06.0lb lists the specific responsibilities of the Restart Panel.
These responsibilities are closely matched to the chartered Review Panel responsibilities:
MC 0350 Recommendations STP Review Panel Actions Review all available information Panel has reviewed the AIT, special, related to the plant shutdown.
and routine resident inspector reports that relate to the status of the plant shutdown and recovery.
Develop plant specific Restart Plan.
No specific Restart Plan was developed, but the basis for the guidance in Appendix A of the MC has been fulfilled.
In addition to the CAL, the following issues have been committed by the licensee for resolution prior to restart:
oSteam generator manway cover stud apparent elongation growth and over-stress
i
?
l l
oStation Problem Report corrective.
l action 3
oService Request backlogs i
oToxic gas monitor repairs Maintain ongoing overview of the The Panel meets approximately licensee's corrective action process weekly, and the meetings are by periodic panel meetings.
documented with minutes.
l Conduct periodic meeting with the Since the TDAFWP events, the l
licensee to discuss progress toward licensee has met with Region IV on implementation of the corrective several occasions: a public AIT l
actions.
exit, three enforcement conferences (one concerning corrective action),.
and a meeting between the Regional Administrator and HL&P corporate executives.
l Provide oversight of NRC followup The Panel has provided input and activities.
oversight to Regional inspection efforts concerning the original TDAFWP followup and other enforcement and non-enforcement issues.
i.
Periodically provide assessment of The Panel's charter requires that licensee performance and corrective Region IV and NRR management are action to NRC management.
provided with assessments of i
licensee performance.
l Provide recommendation for restart.
While not specifically chartered for a plant restart, the Panel was chartered to provide the Regional Administrator with a recommendation for resolution of the issue within the CAL and to continue with a l
followup of the other concerns identified to the licensee beyond plant restart.
t i
1 l
4 i
~
1 i
l STP REVIEW PANEL i
MEETING NOTES - APRIL 6, 1993 l
ATTENDEES
- J. Milhaon
- B. Beach, Director, DRP 4
A. Howell, Deputy Director, DRS T. Stetka, Chief, Project Section D l
W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A M. Satorius, Project Engineer, Project Section D i
C. Hackney, State Liaison Officer J. Gilliland, Public Affairs Officer
- M. Virgilio, Assistant Director, Region IV & V Reactors, NRR
- S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR
- B. Reckley, Project Manager, NRR Participated via Telecon t
PANEL SUBJECTS Current Plant Status was discussed by Tom Stetka, including recent t
issues concerning EDG 22 problems with the attachment studs for the fuel injector pump for the 5L cylinder (item being followed by the DET) and the DRPI/ Rod Control problems that the licensee has addressed over the past week.
This issue of the Rod Control system will probably be an j
additional topic for the discussions at the CAL Public Meeting.
The enforcement conference for the AIT followup inspection (EDG/AFW) j issues was discussed.
Eight apparent violations were identified.
Two corrective action weaknesses were identified and these were f
characterized in the cover letter as a continuation of problems previously discussed in management meetings and enforcement conferences.
This approach was taken to umbrella these Criterion XVI problems with past problems.
An enforcement pre-panel will be conducted following the Oversight Panel Meeting today.
The conference is scheduled for April 16, 1993.
The special inspection regarding the fuse sizing issues was discussed.
This report is ready to be issued and the enforcement conference is i
scheduled for April 22. 1993. The report has two apparent violations and involves an undersized fuse feeding the solid state protection system (SSPS) that during a steam break accident would not be sufficiently sized to carry all the SSPS loads required to mitigated the accident. An enforcement pre-panel will also be conducted following the Oversight Panel Meeting today.
The Panel discussed the DET and any findings thct had developed. The findings are generally in line with observations that the Region has had concerning the licensee. One issue concerning the EDG trips that occur during the cooldown cycle was discussed and it was decided that the resident inspectors would follow that issue.
In addition, if the licensee decides to delete the requirement for the cooldown cycle (one 1
i
1 l
I possibility that has surfaced from the residents following the event) 3 the Panel would pursue further clarification and would request technical assistance from the branches at NRR and the results of any interaction that the licensee has with the EDG vendor.
The Panel discussed the fact that Bill Hehl was meeting with representatives of the City of Austin (one of STP's owners) and a group of interveners that had a number of environmental concerns.
There was a discussion on whether there were sufficient concerns to invite the licensee in for a management meeting to discuss the boric acid corrosion program implementation, overall corrective action program implementation, and other comprehensive issues.
In addition, the appropriate method to invite the licensee in for discussion was r
discussed.
This topic will be discussed further at the next Panel i
Meeting.
The need for an order to the licensee requiring a third party review of I
the corrcctive action program was discussed. A Confirmatory Order following the management meeting that would be conducted in early May would also be an option if the corrective action program were specifically discussed at the meeting.
This issue will also be discussed at the next Panel Meeting.
Joe Gilliland discussed the recent articles that were run by the Houston Chronicle on STP.
In addition, he mentioned that the reporter most responsible for the articles was collecting information for further r
followup articles on STP's security program.
The Panel discussed a recent DRS inspection to close an unresolved item concerning the voidance of an SPR that was also identified in the OSTI.
This unresolved item was directly linked to an allegation concerning MOVs that is also presently open. The issue involves MOV degradation i
that was occurring because of inadequate repair procedures.
In the review of issue, inspectors did find that M0V problems were being addressed with symptomatic repairs and that no rigorous root cause i
analysis was being performed.
In addition, the inspectors noted that t
there were repeat cases of high operating current, local leak rate test deficiencies, and other problems that were due to poor procedures; 1
however, it appeared that the licensee did follow their process for voidance of an SPR. The Panel decided that the issue was resolved and the cover letter will discuss this and additional examples of related poor practice issues.
The Panel decided that it would be appropriate to revisit Manual Chapter 0350 in the next meeting, to ensure that the Panel's actions were j
accomplishing the intent of the MC.
L I
)
1
The topics to be addressed at the STP CAL public meeting was discussed.
The Panel's consensus was that the complete agenda of topics would not be established until the actual meeting date was determined. Topics presently included:
Toxic Gas Monitors l
Corrective Action Efforts (in general)
Service Request Backlog An additional topic that may be included is EDG problems.
In addition, it was decided that the topics would be documented in a letter to the licensee, prior to the meeting. The best date for the CAL Public j
Heeting has been tentatively set for April 19, 1993.
The next meeting will be held on Thursday, April 16, 1993, in Region IV at 8:30 am with NRR participating via Telecon.
t I
h i
h l
1 i
t e
STP REVIEW PANEL i
MEETING NOTES - APRIL 12, 1993 ATTENDEES B. Beach, Director, DRP A. Howell, Deputy Director, DRS D. Chamberlain, Deputy Director, DRSS T. Stetka, Chief, Project Section D W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A M. Satorius, Project Engineer, Project Section A G. Sanborn, Enforcement Officer R. Wise, Allegation Coordinator L. Williamson, Director Office of Investigation, RIV Field Office
- M. Virgilio, Assistant Director, Region IV & V Reactors, NRR
- S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR
- B. Reckley, Project Manager, NRR Participated via Telecon PANEL SUBJECTS The Allegation Coordinator discussed all the current open allegations at STP. A number have been referred to 01 for further !qvestigation and several aged allegations are being considered by DOL. bkT was able to close the technical issues regarding two allegations involving MOVs; the report will be signed out this week.
Four relatively new allegations that were received by the DET. Two of these allegations were referred to 01 and an investigator is on site this week conducting interviews with the concerned party. The third new allegation is being resolved internally by the Region coordinating with Headquarters. The last new allegation involving accidental discharge of firearms inside the protected area has been assigned to DRSS for action.
The enforcement conference for the AIT followup inspection (EDG/AFW) issues was discussed, with an enforcement pre-panel being conducted by the Panel members. The rating factors for mitigation and escalation were considered, with a discussion on the manner that the eight apparent violations would be grouped and characterized.
Presently, it appeared to the Panel that two severity level III violations had been identified; i
however, depending on the manner that the licensee approached the issues at the enforcement conference, the final disposition of the violations would remain pending.
The conference has been rescheduled for April 22, 1993.
i The special inspection regarding the fuse sizing issues was not discussed because the enforcement conference was rescheduled for May 6, 1993.
The Panel will discuss this issue at the next meeting.
f The Panel decided that the proposed management meeting to be requested in conjunction with the steam generator stud elongation inspection report would not conducted. The issues that the Panel felt were
t necessary for discussion would be addressed in either the restart meeting (which satisfies the CAL requirements), or a separate meeting to i
be held at an unspecified date concerning the licensee's continued corrective action program implementation problems.
The Panel discussed the DET and any findings that had developed. Bill l
Johnson presented an encapsulation of the DET's findings over the first i
two weeks of the inspection. This encapsulation is attached to these meeting notes.
In addition, Bill Hehl, the DET Leader will brief the Panel via telecon on his observations on April 22, 1993.
l 1
There has been no better date proposed for the CAL public meeting.
Presently, the official date that the licensee is willing to commit to I
is April 19, 1993; however, the Panel's consensus is that that date will i
slip by at least one week and more probably two weeks.
l The topics to be addressed at the STP CAL public meeting was discussed.
j As at previous Panel meetings, the consensus was that the complete agenda of topics would not be established until the actual meeting date
.i was determined. Topics presently included:
j i
foxic Gas Monitors Corrective Action Efforts (in general)
Service Request Backlog Rod Control Problems and vendor information program problems Continuing EDG problems j
A briefing will be conducted on Thursday April 15, 1993, to discuss the
~
IG/01 investigations that were conducted at STP. NRR members of the Panel will participate in that briefing and inform the remainder of the Panel of the results.
/
The Panel discussed the recent routine resident inspector's inspection report. That report identified six severity level IV violations. The Panel decided that one violation, with four examples of a failure to properly conduct self-verification, will not be cited, but rather incorporated into an enforcement package on self-verification problems' presently at 0E in Headquarters.
5 The Panel decided that it would be appropriate to enter Manual Chapter 0350.
Bill Johnson was tasked to review the Manual Chapter, and determine the action that would be needed to ensure that the requirements of Manual Chapter 0350 were being addressed.
The next meeting will be held on Thursday, April 22, 1993, in Region IV l
at 8:30 am with NRR participating via Telecon, j
l
f ATTACHMENT TO THE STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - APRIL 12, 1993 INTERIM DET FINDINGS AND CONCERNS AT STP -
SUMMARY
- 4/12/93 1001 TECHNICAL SPEC INTERPRETATIONS CONCERN ABOUT INTERFACE BETWEEN TS INTERPRETATIONS AND OPS POLICIES AND PRACTICES MANUAL s
CONCERN ABOUT SCOPE OF REVIEW AND MGMT CONTROLS APPLIED TO P&P MANUAL e
WHY S0 MANY TSIs, WHY NOT REVISE TS. TSIs MAY BE A WAY TO REVISE TS WITHOUT NRC APPROVAL e
PEN AND INK CHANGES TO CR TS 1002 OPERATOR STAFFING LEVELS MAY NOT BE ADEQUATE FOR EXISTING WORK LOAD e
PIPELINE MAY NOT BE EFFECTIVE e
INSUFFICIENT TIME FOR MEANINGFUL OJT e
MANY OPERATOR WORK-AROUNDS e
STAFFING LEAN FOR SURVEILLANCES ADMIN BURDENS 1003 OPERATOR WORK-AROUNDS e
INCREASE NORMAL OPERATOR WORK LOAD 1004 LCO ENTRIES - MANY DUE TO 3-TRAIN SYSTEM 1007 AUX BOILERS, ONE OUT OF SERVICE, ONE LIMITED TO 40%
1008 OVERTIME CONTROL - APPARENT BLANKET APPROVAL FOR RP0s TO EXCEED OVERTIME CONTROLS 1009 LABELLING - EXTENSIVE USE OF MAGIC MARKER LABELS 1010 PMT e
DIFFICULT FOR OPERATORS e
CUMBERSOME, PROCESS PROBLEMS FOR SS e
UNDUE RESPONSIBILITY ON SS, MINIMAL FRONT END INVOLVEMENT 1011 DESIGN CONCERN - AUTO TRANSFER OF RHR FLOW CONTROL FROM CR TO AUX SD PANEL ON LOSS OF POWER 1012 POOR TEST SCHEDULING EXCESS LC0 ENTRIES SINCE DO NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF EQUIPMENT RUNS e
DURING THE PERIOD WHICH ARE MADE FOR OTHER PURPOSES
.l 1013 CUMBERSOME SURVEILLANCES SIGNIFICANT SCOPE, LONG PROCEDURES, HIGH MANPOWER REQMTS 1014 MGMT RESPONSE, EVAL OF PROBLEMS CHILLING EFFECT
l 1015 AUTHORITY OF SS e
DECISIONS CONSTANTLY CHALLENGED ON OPERABILITY, OT AUTHORIZATION, PRIORITIES 1016 TRIPS.T0 OTHER PLANTS - BUDGET AND STAFFING LIMITS 1017 OPS INFLUENCE THROUGHOUT PLANT - LACK OF OPS PERSONNEL IN OTHER DEPTS 1018 NIGHT ORDERS, MEMOS - MAY DIRECT ACTIVITIES WHICH SHOULD BE CONTROLLED BY PROCEDURES 1019 LOOSE FASTENERS - MANY NOTED ON ELECTRICAL PANELS 1020 TRAINING OFFICES - REMOTE LOCATION WITH RESPECT TO SIMULATOR 1021 CLOCKS IN CONTROL ROOM NOT SYNCHRONIZED 1022 LOCKED VALVES AND DEVICES - MANY COMPARED TO OTHER PLANTS 1023 TARGET ROCK VALVES HOW TO TEST THE VALVES e
LONG STANDING PROBLEM 1024 LIMITED EFFECTIVENESS OF OPERATIONS SELF ASSESSMENT CAPABILITY 102S WORK TRIAGE SYSTEM NOT PROCEDURALIZED 1026 0UTAGE SCHEDULING COMPUTER PROGRAM PROBLEMS 1027 TRAINING - CONCERN ABOUT ABILITY TO ACCOMPLISH AS PLANNED - OJT FR0 ZEN, EVALUATOR REQUAL, DEFERRED DUE TO OUTAGE 2001 EDG FUEL PUMP HOLD DOWN BOLTS POOR ROOT CAUSE e
POOR MAINTENANCE PROCESS FAILURE TO EVALUATE TOOLS VEND 0R INFO NOT INCLUDED IN PROGRAM 2002 EDG START LOGS - INTERPRETATION PROBLEMS VALID VS NONVALID FAILURES e
VALID VS NONVALID TESTS e
REINTERPRETATIONS OF CONCLUSIONS 2003 EDG EXCESS WEAR VS RUN TIME 2004 VETIP WEAKNESSES 2005 EDG HISTORY RECORDS INADEQUATE 2006 QC ENGINEERS NOT DOCUMENTING EDG PROBLEMS 2007 MATERIAL REDUCTION PROGRAM WEAKNESS i
2008 NO PROCEDURE FOR TROUBLESHOOTING EDG OR WRITING EDG HEALTH REPORTS 2009 VETIP WEAKNESS - DRAWINGS ILLEGIBLE 2010 EDG MATERIAL CONDITION IDENTIFICATION WEAKNESSES 2011 VETIP WEAKNESS - REVIEW 0F EDG PM PROGRAM 2012 WEAKNESS IN IDENTIFYING PROBLEMS - CRAFT 2013 TRAINING APPLICATION WEAKNESS t
2014 SYSTEM ENGINEER PERFORMANCE NOT PERFORMING SOME OF THEIR REQD FUNCTIONS e
DO NOT FULLY UNDERSTAND THEIR SYSTEMS UNABLE TO PURSUE CORRECTION OF PROBLEMS 2015 REPEAT MAINTENANCE ON EDGs POOR MAINTENANCE PRACTICES PARTS PROCUREMENT L
ENGINEERING ALLOWED USE OF INCOMPATIBLE MATL 2016 PMT PROCEDURES FOR MOLDED CASE CKT BRKRS WEAK 2017 IST - MANY COMPONENTS IN ALERT RANGE 2018 CREW LEADER FIELD SUPERVISION G0ALS NOT MET, CANNOT BE MET BASED ON JOB DESCRIPTION 2019 MAINTENANCE MORALE SUFFERED DUE TO SHIFT SCHEDULE 2021 NO REFRIGERATION TRAINING FOR I&C 2022 PARTS AVAILABILITY PROBLEMS, LACK 0F SPARE PARTS 2024 COMPUTER IS SLOW RESPONDING TO INQUIRIES 2025 PEOPLE MAKE THE PROGRAMS WORK, NOT THE PROCEDURES 2026 MAINT RESOURCES CONSTRAINED BY EFFORT TO GET OFF INPO TRAINING PROBATION 2027 SURVEILLANCE TESTING PROGRAM INADEQUATE, PROCEDURES WEAK 2028 POOR FEEDWATER SYSTEM DESIGN AND MATERIAL CONDITION PLACES EXTRA BURDEN ON OPS AND MAINT, CAUSES SYSTEM PERTURBATIONS 2032, 2033 PRA/IPE NOT USED IN MAINTENANCE AND TESTING t
2035 SICK TIME GREATLY INCREASED THIS YEAR 2036 HOUSEKEEPING POOR IN SOME AREAS 2037 NO FORMAL COMPUTER TRAINING FOR CREW LEADERS AND HEAD JOURNEYMEN
- -. ~
2038 LACK OF IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTIVE ACTION FOR REPEAT EQUIPMENT FAILURES 2039 HIGH TURNOVER OF MAINTENANCE MGMT IN RECENT YEARS 2040 MANY REVISIONS TO WORK PACKAGES 2041 DIFFICULT FOR PLANNERS TO IDENTIFY PARTS t
i 2042 BATTERY DISCHARGE SURVEILLANCE TEST PROCEDURE WEAK 2043 SPR INVESTIGATOR NOT KNOWLEDGEABLE ON THE PROBLEM 2044 MOVATS PROCEDURE CUMBERSOME, 289 PAGES, EDGES TAPED TOGETHER TO PREVENT LOSS OF PAGES, THUS NOT READILY USED IN THE FIELD 2045 DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE PMT REQUIREMENTS 2046 WORK CONTROL PROCESS LACKS OVERALL C0 ORDINATION 2047 ONLY 20% OF MAINT PERSONNEL HAVE PRIOR NUCLEAR EXPERIENCE 20-PLANNERS WORK 10 -12 HOURS PER DAY i
20-MANY PM FEEDBACKS AWAIT PROCESSING 3001 CIRCUIT BREAKER OPERABILITY CONCERNS - GREASE HARDENING AND OTHER CONCERNS 3002 MANY UNINCORPORATED AMENDMENTS TO VENDOR DRAWINGS 3003 SYSTEM ENGINEER WALKDOWNS WEAK, MANY NOT DONE, T00 BUSY f
3004 FUEL INJECTOR PUMP HOLD DOWN STUDS - RECURRING PROBLEM, INADEQUATE CORRECTIVE ACTION 3005 UNSECURED MATERIAL STORED IN SEISMIC AREA 3006 UNIT 1 CONTROL RODS STUCK, LACK 0F RESPONSE TO VENDOR INFO 3007 ESSENTIAL CHILLER MODIFICATION PROBLEMS 3009 STP IS OUTLIER IN LERs CAUSE CODES 3010 REDUCING RESOURCES AFTER INITIAL PROBLEM CORRECTION 3011 CIRCUIT BREAKER SETPOINTS WRONG
[
3013 TORNADO DAMPER TESTING - DOES NOT SHOW DAMPERS WILL ACTUATE AS REQUIRED 3014 EDG ROCKER ARM OPERABILITY, FAILURE TO TORQUE, DID NOT USE VENDOR INFO 3016 POOR TRAINING FOR SYSTEM ENGINEERS
t 3018 RCA NOT DONE BY THE MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE PEOPLE 3019 SYSTEM ENGINEER RESPONSIBILITIES ARE TOO BROAD, CANNOT HANDLE LONG TERM TASKS, FOCUS ON CURRENT URGENT SITUATION i
3020 SYS ENG SUPV CANNOT CONTROL SYS ENG WORKLOAD 3021 INADEQUATE EQUIPMENT HISTORY DATABASE 3022 MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM WEAKNESS 3023 T00 MANY SYSTEMS PER SYS ENG 3024 MANY ENGINEERING BACKLOGS 3025 REPEAT FAILURES ON T0XIC GAS ANALYZERS 3026 PRA NOT REVISED BASED ON ACTUAL COMPONENT PERFORMANCE 302B ESSENTIAL CHILLER TESTING CONCERNS I
3029 ESSENTIAL CHILLER OPERABILITY CONCERNS POST DBA l
l 3030 INCONSISTENCIES WITH EDG FAILURE DOCUMENTATION i
3031 MODIFICATIONS DELAYED, DEFERRED, OR CANCELLED 4
3032 CONCERN WITH CONTROL AND IMPACT OF TEMPORARY MODIFICATIONS i
i f
l i
4 i
STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - APRIL 22, 1993
[
ATTENDEES i
B. Beach, Director, DRP S. Collins, Director, DRS i
A. Howell, Deputy Director, DRS D. Chamberlain, Deputy Director, DRSS W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A M. Satorius, Project Engineer, Project Section A J. Tapia, Senior Resident Inspector, Project Section A B. Murray, Chief, FIPS, DRSS G. Sanborn, Enforcement Officer J. Gilliland, Public Affairs Officer
- W. Hehl, DET Leader
- H. Virgilio, Assistant Director, Region IV & V Reactors, NRR S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR L. Kokajko, Senior Project Manager, NRR I
Participated via Telecon PANEL SUBJECTS 4
Bill Johnson gave a brief plant status.
The Allegation Coordinator briefly discussed all the current open allegations at STP. The current allegations are able to be resolved by Region IV inspectors, with the assistance of several 01 investigations.
t Potential issues for restart were discussed (these are the subject of an attachment to the Agenda).
Based on the discussions, the Panel decided to defer the CAL public meeting until after the DET interim exit that will be conducted on April 30, 1993. The best date for the CAL public meeting appears to be May 5,1993; however, this date is considered tentative.
Bill Hehl, DET Leader, gave a briefing on the current issues that were identified during the first two weeks of the DET. An encapsulation of these issues are listed below:
GENERAL COMMENT
S In all four functiot.1 areas, the team is pursuing issues regarding:
i
- Communications
- Adequacy of root cause analysis and failures of corrective actions
- Adequacy of staffing OPS / TRAINING J
1.
Management's interaction with Operations has produced conflicting i
guidance, often. senior licensee management bypasses operation's management, and operator confidence in making decisions has been affected.
l
i i
2.
Operations and senior plant management spends very little time in the plant.
3.
Shift supervisors appear to have little authority to prioritize work activities.
4.
There is extensive operator overtime.
5.
There is a large number of " work-arounds" due to degraded equipment.
i 6.
Operations training has been deferred due to the outages-which essentially means since September 1992.
7.
RP0 training has been deferred, in addition to there being minimal numbers available for shift staffing. Other RP0 problems include:
- Excessive overtime
- RP0 pipeline has not kept up with the depletion of RP0s due to licensed operator classes
- Fire Brigade Leader training lapses by chemical operators has i
further subjected RP0s to overtime and excessive duties
[
8.
Although the 1993 budget had cut a large number of RP0s for the training pipeline, management has reversed that decision and will increase the number of RP0s. Attempts to enact a speed-up of the RPO training has not been effective due to the relative in-plant inexperience of RP0 trainees.
9.
The units (due in part to the three train design and poor material condition) enter a large number of LCOs per day (as many as 100 per day), whici. increases the administrative burdens on the operations staff.
10.
A large number of operator errors were noted, and weaknesses in the post maintenance testing program has been identified.
11.
Plant labeling is considered poor.
12.
Nine different computer systems, each with its own language burdens operators.
13.
Poor root cause evaluation systems:
- Program is good, with improvements noted over the past several l
years; however the backlog is large
- Corrective Action Group is responsible for the administration of the corrective action program, but is not effective and i
essentially shuffles station problem reports to an overburdened operations staff for resolution l
14.
Plant labelling is poor and the label upgrade project had been deferred by budget restrictions.
t MAINTENANCE / TESTING I
1.
Maintenance backlog is very large - 5600 to 5700 items.
Contributing factors:
- Weak planning and scheduling support
- Inefficient and ineffective work control and management 2.
The vendor information program is weak:
l
- P&ID backlog has 10,000 items outstanding
+0ther examples include rod control technical bulletins and EDG rocker arm torque values 3.
Equipment history ineffective with large backlog.
4.
Numerous recurring equipment problems:
- EDGs
- IST program-many pumps and valve on accelerated testing periodicity I
i
l
- ECW system
- Essential chillers
- Auxiliary boiler
- Many B0P equipment problems These equipment problems add to the burden on operators due to the amount of operator time that must be expended on operating this equipment in the manual mode of operation.
5.
Maintenance training is weak, as evidenced by the maintenance training program being on INP0 probation.
- Craft training is weak-the licensee has decided to hire 50 to 60 contractor workers to permit their own craft to be trained
- Poor craft training has exacerbated the work control problems identified earlier
.The former Training Manager had identified several year ago that the reduction of resources allocated to maintenance training would result in future problems; he resigned under pressure in the Fall of 1992.
6.
The licensee continually sets unrealistic outage length goals, due to the scope of the work to be completed.
7.
The ineffectiveness of work control is partially due to the poor quality of maintenance and surveillance procedures.
8.
The DET will look further at the licensee's station lubrication program.
ENGINEERING 1.
There has not been aggressive implementation of the corrective action i
program.
2.
Engineering quality has been affected by the vendor information program and the large vendor drawing backlog.
3.
The system engineering program is weak:
. System engineers are not performing system walkdowns
- System walkdowns that are completed are poor and not comprehensive
- System health reports are not completed at required intervals and are not being effectively utilized l
- System engineers are not adequately familiar with their systems, t
are overworked, and generally are poorly trained 4.
There is a large backlog of modifications.
5.
The DET will continue to analyze apparent inadecuacies in design basis requirements.
i 6.
A number of inadequacies in post maintenance testing are present on essential chillers and EDGs.
MANAGEMENT / ORGANIZATION 1.
Self-assessments are of limited scope.
2.
The ISEG staff is marginal-with the ISEG manager not being effective.
3.
The licensee has a poor management information system, and does not effectively utilize the information system that is'available.
4.
The DET has a number of questions regarding the validity of EDG testing and the licensee's determination of several non-valid failures.
The DET will continue to pursue this issue on the last week on-site.
t
i i
5 5.
The station problem report initiation guidance is inadequate. An observation was made that the number of station problem reports generated over the last four to six weeks has increased dramatically.
6.
One of the reasons that outage scopes are unrealistic is that engineering planning of outages is not realistic.
POSITIVES 1.
High quality staffing exists.
2.
Management expectations appear to be realistic, but the workload is not taken into account in the expectations.
3.
Radiation protection is good.
4.
Design basis documentation and information is good.
5.
The technical support engineering group is enhancing quality of work.
6.
Site facilities are excellent, or at least as good as any DET member has-seen.
i The Panel did not discuss MC 0350. The next meeting's primary topic will be this matter.
S. Black gave a brief description of the IG/01 investigation results at l
STP.
The next Panel meeting will be on the moriiing of May 6,1993, prior to-the SSPS fuse enforcement conference, which is scheduled for 1 pm.
F b
l l
I h
e
m STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - MAY 5 AND 6. 1993 ATTENDEES - MAY 5 B. Beach, Director, DRP A. Howell, Deputy Director, DRS D. Chamberlain, Deputy Director, DRSS W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A
- J. Tapia, Senior Resident Inspector, Project Section A G. Sanborn, Enforcement Officer J. Gilliland, Public Affairs Officer R. Wise, Allegation Coordinator
- 1. Barnes, Technical Assistant, DRS
- M. Virgilio, Assistant Director, Region IV & V Reactors, NRR
- S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR
- L. Kokajko, Senior Project Manager, NRR Participated via Telecon ATTENDEES - MAY 6 B. Beach, Director., CRP S. Collins, Director, L'RS J. Callan, Director, DRSS W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A J. Tapia, Senior Resident In:pector, Project Section A J. Gilliland, Public Affairs Officer M. Virgilio, Assistant Director, Region IV & V Reactors, NRR
- S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR L. Kokajko, Senior Project Manager, NRR Participated via Telecon PANEL SUBJECTS - MAY 5 Bill Johnson gave a brief plant status.
l The Allegation Coordinator briefly discussed the current open allegations at STP. The 13 current open allegations are able to be resolved by Region IV inspectors, with the assistance of several OI investigations.
Bill Beach gave a briefing on the DET interim exit meeting held at STP on April 30, 1993.
Briefing notes follow.
l I.
OPERATIONS Staffing levels appear marginal; deferred training reduction could impact plant safety; excessive overtime / fatigue Scope of activities and administrative burden - personnel errors i
Communications - confusing and conflicting guidance to CRs Inability to identify and correct problems (work-arounds)
Operator performance - degraded and inoperable equipment 1
II.
MAINTENANCE Adequacy of post-maintenance testing program Training not adequate / appropriate for craft activities in the field Significant number of barriers to achieving good performance Work Control Process - burdensome, cumbersome; backlogs Overtime - fatigue has existed for over six months Parts - wrong parts in field, wrong components Predictive Maintenance Program - burdened by workload Resources severely strained Procedures do not align well with experience, capability of craft Maintenance / Surveillance Program - technical adequacy system Engineer Program not effectively implemented -
Support Systems not adequate Assignment of back-up-systems too broad - some do not know Design basis knowledge limited - training weak
{
III.
ENGINEERING Essential Chilled Water System Design Basis Review Incomplete - cold weather, low load T-mode, remove auto _-action throttling valves Reliability, equipment history Testing has not demonstrated system will perform under all DB conditions Testing of tornado dampers not adequate I
\\
Fire Protection - seal shrinkage, computer system
]
Electrical setpoints - molded case circuit breakers Modification backlog excessive, some SR - needs prioritization j
i I
l
'l
i Management Information Systems weak, not serving purpose Root Cause Analysis weak IV MANAGEMENT /0RGANIZATION Dichotomy - issues raised to too high levels involvement of management in plant very limited Communications and coordination not at level needed Expectations not effectively communicated Aggressive QA organization - not translated into resolution NSRB effective, but again - issues not dealt with ISEG not effective Performance Indicators not capturing real picture of performance V
POSITIVES Good people and staff - too many barriers in-place Radiological Protection Program - aggressive ALARA Design basis documentation packages good Tech Support Engineering program good QA program reviews and surveillances impressive Excellent facilities VI BILL COTTLE COMMENTS Diagnostic & STP staff have done outstanding job - openness and candor Communications candid and succinct Issues - Basic management and basic process Can be resolved by procedure changas and input Need to facilitate work force input Encouraged by Diagnostic -- will not take a siege mentality Will use to focus problems at STP
The Panel discussed issues which must be addressed prior to restart.
These issues, after further discussion with Bill Hehl and others over the next two days, are listed below:
The Station Problem Report process including process improvements, threshold, and results of licensee review of existing reports for issues affecting equipment operability and safe plant operation; The Service Request backlog including reduction accomplished l
e during the current outages and results of the licensee's review of outstanding Service Requests for issues affecting equipment operability, safe plant operation, and operator work-arounds; The post maintenance test program, including corrective actions in o
response to recent violations and other process improvements and-the basis for licensee confidence that equipment removed from service for maintenance is properly restored to an operable status; The outstanding design modifications and temporary modifications, e
and other engineering backlog items, including the results of the licensee's review of these for issues affecting equipment operability, safe plant operation, and operator work-arounds; Staffing in the operations department including adequacy of e
current staffing levels, plans for replacing planned and unexpected losses to support safe plant startup and operation, and the adequacy of staffing under emergency conditions; The status of fire brigade leader training including verification that this training meets regulatory requirements; s
The status of the fire protection computers including reliability I
e and functionality of operator interface; Management effectiveness in identifying, pursuing, and correcting plant problems, including any plans for independent reviews; and The results of internal restart readiness reviews.
l This listing of topics was subsequently incorporated into a letter to the licensee, supplementing the CAL of February 5,1993.
The licensee was advised that if other such topics are identified prior to the briefing, they would be i
advised by letter or telephone. The licensee was requested to inform Mr.
Milhoan when licensee staff has made significant progress in addressing these issues so a special inspection could be scheduled prior to the briefing.
j The panel agreed that Region IV would plan an inspection to review the
[
licensee's readiness for restart prior to the public CAL briefing, which would most likely be after the DET final exit meeting (June 3,1993).
P b
t
a s
~
e i
The panel discussed the pending inspection to address the missing seismic screws in the QDPS system.
The SRI has the lead on this inspection.
t The panel discussed pending inspections to address the mispositioned main feedwater isolation valve bypass valve and the missing T-drain on a motor operator for a residual heat removal system valve.
DRS will take i
the lead on these inspections.
l The next Panel meeting was not firmly scheduled.
It is expected to be held during the week of May 17, 1993.
PANEL SUBJECTS - MAY 6
\\
The Panel discussed the implementation of Manual Chapter 0350. Status l
and action assignments follow:
MANUAL CHAPTER 0350 REQUIREMENTS AND PROPOSED ACTION ASSIGNMENTS 04.01 Director, NRR, notifies ED0 and Commission of HRC actions concerning shutdown plants and the proposed restart plan.
t Action: Complete, this has been discussed in ED0 conference l
calls.
04.02a RA discuss with Deputy EDO, NRR and OE the need for an ortkr or CAL to specify the required licensee actions to receive NRC restart approval and the proposed followup plan.
Action:
RIV issued CAL on 2/5/93.
Panel monitor need for order.
Region IV to send letter to licensee with additional concerns.
)
(Note: A CAL Supplement was issued on May 7, 1993) 04.02b RA decide with NRR AD for Projects whether this MC applies.
Action:
It has been agreed that MC 0350 applies.
I i
04.02c RA coordinate with NRR AD for Projects to decide whether to establish a Restart Ptnel.
Action: Complete, the STP Oversight Panel is the Restart Panel.
The membership remains unchanged.
04.02d RA coordinate with NRR AD for Projects to develop a Restart Action Plan, with checklist and responsibility assignments and schedules.
Action: DRP and NRR PM develop plan and present to Panel.
04.02e RA coordinate and implement assigned actions of Restart Action Plan.
Action:
Future action after Plan approval.
=-
i 04.02f RA and NRR review acceptability of licensee's corrective action program.
f Action: Discuss in future Panel meeting.
04.02g RA consult with EDO and NRR and approve plant restart.
i Action:
Future action.
04.03 NRR AD for Projects act as focal point for discussions in NRR to establish followup actions.
Action: NRR 04.04a NRR Projects Assistant Director coordinate participation in followup conference calls and management discussions to ensure RA and Director, NRR, involvement in followup action.
Action: NRR 05.02 Initial actions.
L Action:
CAL issued, AIT inspection and follow inspection performed, DET inspection ongoing.
i 06.01a Restart Panel membership.
i Action:
Complete, the Panel consists of-i Bill Beach, Director, DRP Art Howell, Deputy Director, DRS Dwight Chamberlain, Deputy Director, DRSS i
Marty Virgilio, AD for Region IV & V Reactors, NRR i
06.0lb Restart Panel responsibilities 06.0lb1 Review information related to shutdown.
Action: Complete.
j 06.0lb2 Develop plant-specific Restart Action Plan.
Action: DRP and NRR PM develop plan and present to Panel.
06.0lb3 Review licensee corrective action or improvement program.
i Action: Future.
t 06.0lb4 Overview licensee performance through periodic meetings.
Action: Ongoing.
06.Olb5 Conduct periodic meetings with the licensee to discuss progress.
l Meetings may be near the site and open to the public.
l T
l f
Action: Panel discuss scheduling.
l 06.0lb6 Provide oversight of NRC followup actions.
Identify NRC inspection and technical review areas.
Action: Ongoing.
06.0lb7 Provide periodic assessment of licensee performance and corrective actions to NRC management.
i Action:
Panel discuss frequency and level of briefings.
06.01b8 After satisfactory completion of licensee restart program,
+
recommend restart approval to RA and Director, NRR.
Action:
Future.
06.02 Restart Action Plan.
Action:
DRP and NRR PM develop plan and present to Panel.
07.01 Coordination of followup activities.
Action:
Panel discuss.
07.02 Commission involvement.
I t
Action:
Panel discuss.
07.03 ACRS involvement.
Action:
Virgilio to call Larkins.
07.04 Public participation.
Action:
CAL restart meeting is to be open to the public.
07.05 Other agencies and government organizations involvement.
i Action:
NRR P!i to call the Office of Congressional Affairs. The i
State of Texas has expressed interest.
08 Records to be maintained and available to the public.
i 4
Action:
NRR PM ensure all required documents are included in the docket file.
/
08a PNs, Commission Information Papers, and'other documents describing the problem.
Action: NRR PM - Director's Highlights 08b CAL or Order.
i
~5
+
t Action: DRP provide to NRR PM.
08c Establishment of Restart Panel and Restart Action Plan.
Action: DRP provide signed memo to NRR PM.
Action: DRP Maintain Restart Action Plan when approved; provide to NRR PM.
08d Interim progress reports (Commission Paper)
08e Restart Panel Meeting minutes and NRC/ licensee meeting minutes.
Action: DRP provide to NRR PM.
Panel meeting notes contain predecisional information and are not releasable at this time.
08f Inspection reports'and related correspondence.
Action: DRP ensure docketing.
1 08g Safety evaluations.
08h Other agency and government actions communicated to NRC.
Action: NRR PM 08i Written restart approval.
f Action:
DRP ensure docketing.
l i
i I
i
STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - JUNE 16, 1993 i
ATTENDEES i
B. Beach, Director, DRP S. Collins, Director, DRS J. Callan, Director, DRSS S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A M. Satorius, Project Engineer, Project Section A J. Gilliland, Public Affairs Officer C. Hackney, State Liaison Officer L. Kokajko, Senior Project Manager, NRR B. Spitzberg, Emergency Preparedness Analyst PANEL SUBJECTS f
Panel Membership was discussed, with reference to MC 0350 and the recent l
move of M. Virgilio to another position at Headquarters.
S. Black will replace M. Virgilio.
L. Kokajko and D. Loveless will become panel members.
A. Howell will be replaced by the Director, DRS, or his designee.
D. Chamberlain will be replaced by the Director, DRSS, or his designee.
Bill Johnson will amend the charter to reflect these changes.
The subject of periodic meetings with the licensee was discussed. -The Panel recognized the benefit of conducting periodic meetings onsite with the licensee.
Panel site visits would usually include plant tours, discussion of selected issues with licensee representatives, and a panel 1
meeting.
Charles Hackney indicated that he would approach Mr. Milhoan l
concerning his thoughts on participation by outside sources. Charles i
would communicate Mr. Milhoan's desires back to the Panel.
Bill Johnson gave a brief status of the implementation of MC 0350. The l
checklist was generally up-to-date, but the Project Section would take for action an initiative to ensure that the case specific checklist was i
updated to reflect followup of significant DET issues.
The panel was presented a briefing by DRSS on the recent emergency l
exercise that was conducted onsite. This exercise was an "off" year exercise with no participation outside of the agency. The following six weaknesses were identified Classification - The licensee failed to properly identify and classify the event as a General Emergency.
Weaknesses in the TSC in that there were wea'K technical evaluations of plant conditions and lack of focus on issues needing priority attention.
t 1
i I
~
t Weakness in the emergency response staffing (Admin manager and staff did not respond) in the TSC that aggravated the weak technical evaluation of plant conditions.
Errors in the notification messages to the state and county; this weakness was previously identified in the last exercise at STP.
Medical response was weak; an excessive length of time was 1
required to get the licensee's dedicated ambulance into the t
protected area.
Self-critique weaknesses were noted. The licensee was not able to attach the appropriate significance to the deficiencies that were identified.
The EP inspectors will be returning to the station in the month of August to conduct a exercise walk-through. Any potential restart issues associated with EP that develop from this report would be resolved prior i
to the licensee being ready to request restart.
The only weakness identified that could possibly develop into a FEMA
)
concern was the issue regarding errors in the notification messages to the-state and county. DRSS committed to making a courtesy call to FEMA after the report is issued to alert them of the concerns resulting from the inspection.
In addition, Joe Callan will touch base with Frank Congel of the program office to get their feedback on the issue.
The panel discussed the issuance of an Order.
Benefits from this action would include:
Cease escalated enforcement activities that are presently placing a high demand on NRC staff resources.
Suspend the SALP process.
Assist in the definition of what Agency action is needed prior to plant restart.
An Order would:
I Replace the CAL and the CAL supplement Free up Regional resources to permit more effective inspection of program implementation enhancements prior to restart.
Be optically positive for the Agency.
Bill Beach would contact the RA with the consensus recommendation of the Panel that an Order would be an appropriate enforcement action to be taken at STP.
The Panel discussed SALP at STP. The consensus of the members was that there were too many issues unresolved for the SALP process to make any
l i
r meaningful conclusions in light of the findings in the DET and that a SALP would not serve any positive purpose.
DET followup by Region IV was discussed with respect to the issues that require resolution prior to restart.
The Panel decided that the Project Section should extract the restart issues from the report'and sort them into like categories such that an inspection plan can be developed for later implementation.
The Panel considered the need for a temporary supervisory position at STP, in addition to the SRI. This initiative would be discussed with the RA.
The Panel consensus was that a detail of two years would be beneficial.
The next Panel Meeting was scheduled for June 21, 1993, at 3 p.m.
l i
I l'
h i
)
v i
r
i l
STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - JUNE 21, 1993 ATTENDEES l
J. Milhoan, Regional Administrator B. Beach, Director, DRP S. Collins, Director, DRS J. Callan, Director, DRSS
- S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A M. Satorius, Project Engineer, Project Section A 6
J. Gilliland, Public Affairs Officer C. Hackney, State Liaison Officer G. Sanborn, Enforcement Officer Participated Via Telecon PANEL SUBJECTS The memo drafted by Projects concerning the proposal to change the STP SALP to involve not issuing a report until approximately six months after the restart of the first STP unit was discussed. The Panel and the Regional Administrator concurred that this action was appropriate considering the present circumstances at STP. The period of this SALP report would only cover plant performance the six month following restart.
A memo drafted by Projects concerning a proposal to dispense with portions of the Enforcement process at STP was discussed.
The Panel decided that Gary Sanborn and Bill Beach would pursue the topic with OE for concurrence, and at a minimum, consider the present enforcement action pending against STP on the seismic qualifications of the QDPS a likely candidate for enforcement discretion under the provisions of Part 2,Section VII.B.3. The Regional Administrator agreed with this
+
approach.
The panel briefly discussed the steam generator conference call that was scheduled for the following day.
The purpose of the call was primarily informational in order for NRR and the Region to better understand the licensee's plans with respect to testing steam generator tubes.
The issue from previous Panel meetings regarding the issuance of an Order was discussed. The Regional Administrator stated that based on his insights from the discussions at the recent SMM, an Order would not be required at STP.
The remainder of the agenda was not discussed due to time restraints.
The next meeting was tentatively scheduled for the end of the week of June 2B, 1993.
h T
u
UNITED STATES
[gid EfCg,k NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Y'l R EGloN IV E
511 AYAN PLAZA DRIVE.SulTE ADO o
.R LINGTON. T EXAS 76011-8064 g
0
-y J'JN 3 01993 MEMORANDUM FOR:
James L. Milhoan, Regional Acministrator FROM:
A. Bill Beacn, Director Division of Reactor Projects
SUBJECT:
STP REVIEW PANEL CHARTER - REVISION 1 A proposed revision to the STP Deview Panel Charter is attacned for your approval.
1j 7
l.,
~ lw.kJ
- 4. Bill Beach, Director Division of Reactor Projects
Attachment:
As stated cc w/attacncent:
Panel Memoers W. Johnson I
M. Satorius J. Gillilana C. Hackney l
STP REVIEW PANEL CHARTER Revision 1 PURPOSE The purpose of the STP Review Panei is to:
- Assure consistent approach to issues Deing dentified at South Texas Project and attemot to reach an agency consensus and united approach to addressing the problems at South Texas Project.
- Assure inat the followup on safety significant issues are being properly coordinated and scheduled.
- Scheaule significant meetings ana inspections.
- Assure that the views and concerns of different NRC offices are properly addressea.
- Assure proper coordination for the followup of ssues that are identified by the Diagnostic Evaluation Team (DET) inspection.
MEETING RE0VENCY AND ATTENDANCE The STP Review Panel will te convenec approximately weekly through the Diagnostic Evaluation Team assessment period and curing the extended shutdown of the STP units.
~he Panel will be composed of.ne illowing memoers:
Bill Beach, Director. DRP
- anei Chairman Sam Collins, Director. DRS Joe Callan, Director. DRSS Suzanne Black, Director. PD
- )-2, NRR Lawrence Kokajko, Senior Project Manager. NRR Davic Loveless. Senior Resicent Inspector NOTE:
Panel memoers may designate appropriate substitutes. Attendance may oe via teleconference.
Minutes for eacn meeting w111 be the responsibility of the DRP Section Chief responsible for South Texas Project.
DURATION OF THE PANEL The duration of the STP Review Panel will be at the discretion of the Region IV Regional Administrator.
5-3o-E2 Charter approved:
.w h mes L. Miihoan Date ygional Administrator P M J%vt{L 2AaPJ.
i i
James L..Milhoan,
bec:
I W. D. Johnson Reading File i
i 1
1 i
i A
k i
tLL' RIV:C:PSA/DRP D: DIP i
WDJohnson;it ISBfiten 6/18/93 5/15f93 i
I l
i
.I f
i 1
1 STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - JULY 1. 1993 ATTENDEES B. Beach, Director, DRP A. Howell, Deputy Director, DRS D. Chamberlain, Deputy Director, DRSS
- S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR
- D. Skay, Project Engineer W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A
- D. Loveless, Senior Resident Inspector
- M. Satorius, Project Engineer, Project Section A D. Powers, Chief, Maintenance Section, DRS G. Sanborn, Enforcement Officer Participated Via Telecon PANEL SUBJECTS Plant Status The licensee is leaning toward performing inspections of the steam generators of both units during the outages. A decision is expected this week. Tentative plans are to take Unit I to Mode 3 in late July for testing the turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump and to apply steam to the turbine building to check the effectiveness of various steam system repairs. After this the unit would be cooled down and defueled for steam generator inspections.
Startup of Unit I would then be planned for no earlier than October 1993.
Region IV will provide inspection coverage of the AFW testing.
Panel Membership The Panel charter has been revised to delete M. Virgilio and to add S.
Black, L. Kokajko, D. Loveless, and W. Johnson as members. Another 4
charter revision will be necessary to reflect a new chairman to replace B. Beach who will be unavailable while leading a Diagnostic Evaluation in Region III.
Personnel The new resident inspector, Jack Keeton, reported to the site this week.
l The new senior resident inspector, David Loveless, and the other new resident inspector, Denise Garcia, are expected to riport to the site i
the week of July 12, 1993.
Enforcement Issues Possible enforcement items resulting from the special inspection conducted by DRS covering the main feedwater isolation valve bypass valves and motor operated valve T-drains include:
- 1) incorrect reclassification of the MFIV bypass valve positioners as non-safety i
6
i F
related; 2) inadequate corrective action after the. improper i
reclassification was identified; 3) environmental qualification of bypass valve solenoid valves; 4) failure to calibrate bypass valve positioners; and 5) environmental qualification of a motor operated valve with a missing T-drain. The panel discussed the safety significance of these items and concluded that it did not rise to t
Severity Level III. The licensee has been slow in addressing the associated issues and the panel decided that a management meeting in late July would be used to discuss the issues and the licensee's response.
Possible enforcement items resulting from the special inspection being conducted by DRP covering the loss of spent fuel pool cooling include-
- 1) failure to follow procedures for control board awareness and shift turnovers; 2) failure to conduct adequate operator tours; and 3) inadequate corrective action after a previous similar event. The panel determined that the safety significance of these items did not rise to Severity Level III. These issues and the associated corrective actions will be discussed in a management meeting with the licensee in late July.
i The current resident inspector report (93-15) has several minor violations which will be issued as Severity Level IV with no response required.
The special inspection on the qualified display parameter system was issued on June 30 with one severity Level IV violation with no response required.
Art Howell discussed a pending issue with the questionable thrust capabilities of the PORV block valves.
This could become a startup issue.
i Discussion of Staff Actions Resulting from the DET The panel discussed each of the nine staff actions and agreed to the following responsibility assignments:
Item Responsibility Comments 1.a RIV Restart Inspection 1.b NRR 2.a NRR 2.b NRR 3
RIV DRS to perform I
inspection 4.a RIV with NRR assistance Acceptance criteria-unknown 4.b NRR 5
NRR with RIV assistance 6.a NRR 6.b NRR 7.a NRR 7.b NRR 8
NRR 4
9 RIV with NRR and AEOD Panel coordinate assistance Inspection Program Credit for DET The next QPPR (scheduled for July 14,1993) will discuss adjustments to l
the MIP to take inspection program credit for the inspections performed by the DET as outlined in C. W. Hehl's memo to A. B. Beach, dated June 10, 1993.
Agenda for Panel Meeting at the Site on July 16, 1993 At 7:30 a.m. CDT on July 16, 1993, the Panel will meet in the resident inspector office at the site. The Panel will review the licensee's submittal and determine any areas needing clarification or additional information at the public meeting later the same day.
k i
t i
^
i 4
~
STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - JULY 16. 1993 ATTENDEES r
S. Collins, Director, DRS A. Howell, Acting Deputy Director, DRP
- S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A D. Loveless, Senior Resident Inspector J. Milhoan, Regional Administrator L. Kokajko, Senior Project Manager, NRR Participated Via Telecon PANEL SUBJECTS Plant Status The licensee is completing plans to perform inspections of the steam generators of both units during the outages. The licensee still plans to take Unit I to Mode 3 in late July for testing the turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump and to apply steam to the turbine building to check the effectiveness of various steam system repairs. After this the unit will be cooled down and defueled for steam generator inspections.
Unit 2 SG inspections are being planned for late July through late August.
Unit 1 SG inspections are planned for late August through late September.
Unit I core reload would then be in late October, with power production by the end of the year.
i Inspection Planning 1
Mark Satorius, Jack Keeton, and Denise Garcia are scheduled to be on site during the last week of July to provide inspection coverage of the AFW testing.
i DRS will consider the need to provide inspection coverage of the SG inspection activities.
DRS will consider the need for inspection coverage of the Unit I fuel i
handling activities, possibly a FIRS inspection.
Tracking The panel discussed briefly the types of items which must be tracked to i
ensure appropriate NRC staff review prior to STP restart. The list included IFS items, allegations, 2.206 petitions, DET findings, and emergent issues. DRP will be the focal point for this tracking, with possible assistance to be provided by DRS.
In September a letter from the Regional Administrator to the Director of NRR should be prepared to provide status. The 93400 format may be appropriate for this letter.
Plant Tour Comments
L l
The panel toured the site from 4 - 7 p.m. on July 15, 1993. Primary comments discussed in the panel meeting were:
There was little work in progress in the areas toured. The maintenance department was between shifts during much of this i
- time, i
The areas where work had been in progress were messy, particularly e
the Unit 2 Train A safety injection pump room.
Overall, the plant was clean, with few contaminated areas and e
general access to the containment buildings permissible without anti-contamination clothing.
Some painting activities were observed in progress. The recently e
painted areas presented a very good general appearance.
Local fire protection panels had tags indicating some inoperable e
components.
Agenda for Panel Meeting in the Region IV office on July 30, 1993 At 9 a.m. CDT on July 30, 1993, the Panel will meet in the DRP conference room. The Panel will discuss the approach to be used to track startup issues and other open items which must be reviewed prior to startup and discuss when and how to perform a review of the Speakout program. At 11 a.m. that day, a management meeting with HL&P is scheduled in the Region IV office. At this management meeting, main feedwater isolation valve bypass valve, MOV T-drain, and spent fuel pool cooling issues will be discussed.
L s
STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - JULY 30, 1993 ATTENDEES S. Collins, Director, DRS A. Howell, Acting Deputy Director, DRP S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR i
W. Johnson, Chief Project Section A D. Powers, Chief, Maintenance Section, DRS R. Wise, Allegation Coordinator
- M. Satorius, Project Engineer l
J. Gilliland, Public Affairs Officer Participated Via Telecon PANEL SUBJECTS Plant Status There have been no significant plant status changes.
The licensee plans to take Unit I to Mode 3 in early August for testing the turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump and to apply steam to the turbine building to check the effectiveness of various steam system repairs.
Inspection Planning David Loveless, Jack Keeton, and Denise Garcia are scheduled to be on site during the first week of August to provide inspection coverage of the AFW testing.
DRS will consider the need to provide inspection coverage of the SG inspection activities.
Scheduling information is still needed from the licensee.
Speakout Program Review - The panel will request a briefing on the I
program during the September site visit. Then the panel will determine l
the scope of our review, which would likely be performed in October.
The review team leader will be selected at the next panel meeting. The team leader should be present for the September briefing.
Restart Inspection - DRP will discuss this with the Regional I
Administrator, We need to determine whether RIV or HQ will head the effort.
}
Tracking The panel discussed briefly the types of items which must be tracked to ensure appropriate NRC staff review prior to STP restart. The list included IFS items, al'egations, 2.206 petitions, DET findings, and 1
emergent issues.
DRP, DRS, DRSS, and NRR should prepare preliminary lists before the next panel meeting (currently scheduled for 8/26 at the 1
site).
From the submitted items, a file will be prepared. A task group
~
L will be formed to review this file and to prepare a punch list of items to be resolved before startup. The list will be reviewed with the licensee to assist in coordination of resolution.
Spent Fuel Pool level decrease Mark Satorius described his findings after reviewing the event of 7/21/93.
No major issues have been identified.
The licensee has formed an event review team and a Human Performance Review Board. Mark will provide input to the routine resident inspector report.
City of Austin The city manager has requested a briefing of the city council by the NRC on the DET findings and the placement of STP on the watch list. This will be coordinated by Charles Hackney.
STP Response to the DET report i
STP has informed RIV that they plan to submit a strategy letter next
)
week.
They plan to submit an operational readiness plan in late August.
The Business Plan would be submitted in early October.
Security Issues Joe Callan is planning a trip to the site August 16-17 for a management meeting about issues in the most recent security inspection.
SALP The SALP cycle will be extended until 6 to 9 months after the startup of the first unit.
Management Meeting Some panel members will attend the management meeting on 7/30 in RIV.
DRS and DRP will state their concerns at the beginning of the meeting.
Agenda for the next panel meetina will include:
l Standby diesel generator reverse power relays Results of plant tour Insights from licensee briefings on 8/25 Leader for Speakout program review Tracking list development Restart inspection Briefings at the site during the next visit should include:
Vice President Nuclear Engineering i
Independent assessment of security Site Reorganization i
l m
m
STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - SEPTEMBER 8, 1993 ATTENDEES S. Collins, Director, DRS A. Howell, Acting Deputy Director, DRP J. Roe, Director, Division of Reactor Projects III/IV/V, NRR L. Kokajko, Senior Project Manager, NRR W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A
- R. Wise, Allegation Coo"dinator
- D. Chamberlain, Deputy Director, DRSS
- B. Spitzberg, FIPS D. Garcia, Resident Inspector J. Keeton, Resident Inspector D. Loveless, Senior Resident Inspector Participated Via Telecon PANEL SUBJECTS Allegation Status Russ Wise reviewed the status of open allegations for the panel. There will be a conference call with NRR on September 10, 1993, to discuss Allegation 93-101.
~
DRSS Issues An emergency preparedness accountability drill is scheduled for September 23, 1993.
The Senior Resident Inspector has been asked to observe the drill. No other restart issues have been identified in the emergency preparedness area.
A management meeting was held in the regional office with HL&P on September 1, 1993. At this meeting the licensee provided a review of the recent independent security management assessment results. No restart issues have been identified in the security area.
Standby Diesel Geneiator Reverse Power Relays David Loveless briefed the panel on recent problems with these relays.
l There have been numerous other minor problems identified related to SDG maintenance, modification, and testing.
SDG issues need to be reviewed i
and dispositioned prior to unit restart.
Speakout Program Review l
The licensee is having an independent assessment of the SPEAK 0UT program performed. The review started on September 7 and is expected to be completed in 4 to 6 weeks. The NRC inspection of the program should be i
scheduled after the results of this review are known. DRS will coordinate this for RIV.
Dale Powers will obtain information from the i
t
1 licensee about the scope and schedule of the independent review and DRS will brief the panel at its next neeting. The NRC inspection of the SPEAK 0UT program should include headquarters participation.
Tracking DRS, DRSS, N,ir the Enforcement Off1:er, and the Allegation Coordinator are requesteo io provide a list of po!ential plant restart issues to DRP by September 16, 1993. DRP will revise the draft startup issue list prior to the next panel meeting.
Restart Inspection i
The restart inspection will be led by the Special Inspection Branch.
l The projected time frame for the inspection to start is the second week of December. DRP will prepare a list of potential issues for review during the restart inspection.
In addition to this inspection, RIV will conduct a series of inspections in selected areas.
Chairman's Visit to STP on 9/15 Bill Johnson reviewed the agenda for the visit. The Chairman will be accompanied by the Regional Administrator.
Informal Briefing Schedule after the Public Meeting Briefings on the Operations Work Control Group and the system certification process were scheduled.
Staff Actions from the DET Inspection It was noted that responses to the ED0's memo of August 3, 1993, are due 1
by November 1, 1993. The written responses will provide a summary of the schedule and status of each item in the staff actions memo.
STP Response to the DET report HL&P submitted their operational readiness plan August 28, 1993. The Business Plar, is scheduled for submittal in late October. DRP will prepare a draft acknowledgement letter for the ORP.
1 The next panel meeting is expected to be held in RIV on September 23.
l The agenda for the next panel meeting will include:
Restart plan Case specific checklist review Staff actions from the DET Inspection planning i
l
j l
STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - SEPTEMBER 23. 1993 ATTENDEES
- 5. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR L. Kokajko, Senior Project Manager, NRR W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A l
R. Wise, Allegation Coordinator D. Chamberlain, Deputy Director, DRSS
- D. Loveless, Senior Resident Inspector T. McKernon, Reactor Inspector L. Gilbert, Reactor Inspector M. Satorius, Project Engineer E. Imbro, Chief, Special Inspection Branch, NRR P. Koltay, Section Chief, Special Inspection Branch, NRR Participated Via Telecon PANEL SUBJECTS Plant Status David Loveless briefed the panel on the current status of the units.
Allegation Status Russ Wise reviewed the status of open allegations for the panel.
The Restart Plan will include panel consideration of the status of allegations and whether any open allegations involve issues affecting restart.
SPEAK 0UT Independent Assessment i
The panel members were provided copies of the charter for the independent assessment which is in progress at the site.
The results of the assessment are expected to be available in late October. DRS will prepare the inspection plan and lead the NRC review of the SPEAK 0UT program. Various headquarters groups will be invited to participate.
Tracking List Development (Restart Issues)
Mark Satorius and Tom McKernon briefed the panel on their effort to prepare an inspection report to document and assign tracking numbers to the restart issues. An attachment to the report will present a summary table of the issues and the related items from the DET report, the CAL and its supplement, Licensee Event Reports, and items from previous inspection reports.
ORAT Inspection Planning
i Gene Imbro and Peter Koltay discussed their preliminary plans for pcrforming the ORAT inspection. They were given a list of potential r
issues for review during the inspection.
Peter Koltay will prepare a draft inspection plan for discussion on October 5.
Regional Inspection Planning r
Bill Johnson discussed a draft listing of needed regional inspections and the proposed lead organization for each inspection. Timing of the inspections is dependent on the licensee's schedule for completion of 4
actions related to the issues.
Emergency preparedness and security inspections are planned for October and November.
Inspection plans for the restart issue inspections must be coordinated with DRP.
4 Staff Actions from the DET Inspection I
DRP and NRR will draft response memos to the EDO.
The written responses will provide a summary of the schedule and status of each item in the staff actions memo.
i Docketing Meeting Notes Lawrence Kokajko discussed the MC 0350 requirements for docketing documents related to the panel's activities, such as meeting notes. NRR will review further the scope of documents to be placed on the docket.
DRP will assist in compiling the documents.
DRS will provide administrative assistance.
MC 0350 Checklist Review This item was deferred until 9/27.
DET Item Enforcement Status Mark Satorius discussed his review of the DET report to identify any items for which enforcement actions should be taken. Most such items had been addressed in previous enforcement actions. A future inspection report (or possibly two reports) will assign tracking numbers to DET items which are not considered to be restart issues. Any of these with enforcement potential will be tracked as unresolved items.
Items previously dispositioned with enforcement actions will be identified in a manner to facilitate accounting for the disposition of each item.
System Certification / System Testing Adequacy The licensee has issued procedures for system readiness reviews and system certification.
In general, no augmented testing program is i
planned.
Some extra testing of EDG's may be performed. This topic will be discussed in the public meeting on October 5.
Agenda for Next Public Meeting 1
STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - SEPTEMBER 27, 1993 ATTENDEES S. Collins, Director, DRS A. Howell, Acting Deputy Director, DRP
- S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A T. McKernon, Reactor Inspector T. Westerman, Chief, Engineering Section
- B. Reckley, Project Manager, NRR D. Powers, Chief, Maintenance Section Participated Via Telecon PANEL SUBJECTS SPEAK 0UT Program Review The panel discussed the inspection plan for the NRC review of the SPEAK 0UT program.
Various headquarters groups will be invited to participate.
This will be discussed with the Regional Administrator on September 28.
Restart Issue Review The panel reviewed a draft restart issue list which has been prepared as a part of Inspection Report 9331.
The following issues were on the list. as amended:
TUAFW e
SPR Process e
Service Requests Postmaintenance Testing
.e Engineering Backlogs e
e Operations Staffing e
Fire Brigade Leaders Fire Protection Computer and Related Hardware Problems e
e Management Effectiveness in the Corrective Action Process e
Standby Diesel Generator Issues e
Essential Chiller Issues e
System Certification e
feedwater Isolation Bypass Valve Issues e
SPEAK 0UT Review Tornado Damper Issues Emergency Preparedness Accountability The restart issue list will be modified as ne :::ary. The current list will be discussed with the Regional Administrator on September 28.
Regional Inspection Planning
e 8
Bill Johnson presented a proposed agenda for the October 5 meeting to be held in Arlington.
There was general agreement that the proposed agenda r
was appropriate. A letter to the licensee will document the agenda.
The next panel meeting is expected to be held in RIV on October 5.
The agenda for the next panel meeting will include:
Restart Plan Regional Inspection Planning ORAT Planning Action Item Summary DRS will prepare SPEAK 0UT inspection plan.
e Koltay will prepare a draft ORAT inspection plan for discussion on October 5.
All divisions will coordinate restart issue inspection plans with DRP.
DRP and NRR will draft response memos to the EDO staff actions memo.
NRR will determine which documents should be docketed.
DRP will assist in compiling the documents to be docketed.
e DRS will provide administrative assistance in docketing documents e
and preparing a Region IV file.
DRP will prepare one (or two) inspection report (s) to assign o
tracking numbers to DET items which are not considered to be restart issues.
DRP will send a letter to the licensee with the October 5 agenda.
f 1
5
The panel discussed a draft listing of needed regional inspections and the proposed lead organization for each inspection. Tom Westerman will prepare an inspection plan for standby diesel generator issues. Dale Powers is preparing an inspection plan for the SPEAK 0UT review.
Les Constable is preparing an inspecticn plan for fire protection issues.
All inspection plans for the restart issue inspections will be coordinated with DRP.
MC 0350 Checklist Review r
The panel reviewed the draft checklist from MC 0350.
Bill Johnson will incorporate the panel's comments and prepare a draft restart action plan.
Action Item Summary DRS will discuss the SPEAK 0UT inspection plan with the Regional i
Administrator.
DRS/DRP will discuss the draft startup issue list with the e
Regional Administrator.
All divisions will coordinate restart issue inspection plans with DRP.
Tom Westerman will prepare an inspection plan for standby diesel generator issues.
Dale Powers is preparing an inspection plan for the SPEAK 0UT review.
Les Constable is preparing an inspection plan for fire protection e
issues.
Bill Johnson will and prepare a draft restart action plan.
e
STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - OCTOBER 5. 1993 ATTENDEES S. Collins, Director, DRS A. Howell, Acting Deputy Director, DRP S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR L. Kokajko, Senior Project Manager, NRR i
W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A R. Wise, Allegation Coordinator D. Chamberlain, Acting Director, DRSS D. Loveless, Senior Resident Inspector T. McKernon, Reactor Inspector M. Satorius, Project Engineer E. Imbro, Chief, Special Inspection Branch, NRR P. Koltay, Section Chief, Special Inspection Branch, NRR J. Jacobson, Senior Operations Engineer, Special Inspection Branch, NRR PANEL SUBJECTS Plant Status l
David Loveless briefed the panel on the current status of the units.
Allegation Status Russ Wise reviewed the status of open allegations for the panel.
Draft Restart Action Plan Bill Johnson presented the draft Restart Action Plan and its draft cover memo.
Panel members were requested to provide comments / concurrence by noon on 10/8/93.
Regional Inspection Planning Bill Johnson discussed the necessary regional inspections to address restart issues. The planned starting date for several of the inspections has been established. DRP will discuss the inspection schedule with the licensee to determine whether the licensee will be ready for inspection by the scheduled dates.
The issue of " Management effectiveness in identifying, pursuing, and correcting plant problems," should be a part of each restart inspection pl an.
ORAT Inspection Planning Gene Imbro, Peter Koltay, and Jeff Jacobson discussed their draft inspection plan for the ORAT inspection.
DRP will discuss the draft inspection plan with DRIL on October 6 to select appropriate dates for i
1
covered in the ORAT inspection.the inspection and to determine w ems will be Agenoa for Next Panel Meeting The next Panel meeting will be scheduled for 2 p m resident inspector's office at STP.
.. on October 28 in the status, restart action plan review, regional inspection planningTh inspection planning and team composition, review of inspecti
, ORAT review of the licensee's schedule, and review of panel action it on findings, ems.
Agenda for Next Public Meeting The next public meeting will be scheduled for October 29 at 9
\\
STP.
Proposed agenda items include:
a.m. at b
The licensee's business plan Line management self assessments Independent assessments Results of SDG assessment team Results of system certification process to date Specific augmented testing plans for systems and components Licensee determination of which restart items will be v implementation effectiveness or Status of restart item completion Action Item Summary Items from past meetings:
DRP and NRR will draft response memos to the ED0 staff actio memo.
ns e
NRR will determine which documents should be docketed DRP will assist in compiling the documents to be docketed DRP will prepare one (or two) inspection report (s) to assig tracking numbers to DET items which are not considered to be n
restart issues.
Tom Westerman will prepare an inspection plan for standby dies l generator issues.
e e
Dale Powers is preparing an inspection plan for the SPEAK 00T review.
e Les Constable is preparing an inspection plan for fire protecti issues.
on e
Tom Westerman will prepare an inspection plan for engineeri backlog issues.
ng New Items:
e Panel members will provide restart action plan comments /connurrence by noon on 10/8/93.
determine whether the licensee will be ready for i scheduled dates.
y the
o the inspection and to determine which MC 0350 checklist items will be covered in the ORAT inspection.
Agenda for Next Panel Meeting The next Panel meeting will be scheduled for 2 p.m. on October 28 in the resident inspector's office at STP. The agenda will include allegation status, restart action plan review, regional inspection planning, ORAT inspection planning and team composition, review of inspection findings, review of the licensee's schedule, and review of panel action items.
Agenda for Next Public Meeting The next public meeting will be scheduled for October 29 at 9 a.m. at STP.
Proposed agenda items include:
The licensee's business plan Line management self assessments Independent assessments Results of SDG assessment team Results of system certification process to date Specific augmented testing plans for systems and components Licensee determination of which restart items will be verified for implementation effectiveness Status of restart item completion Action Item Summary Items from past meetings:
DRP and NRR will draft response memos to the EDO staff actions memo.
NRR will determine which documents should be docketed.
DRP will assist in compiling the documents to be docketed.
DRP will prepare one (or two) inspection report (s) to assign tracking numbers to DET items which are not considered to be restart issues.
Tom Westerman will prepare an inspection plan for standby diesel generator issues.
Dale Powers is preparing an inspection plan for the SPEAK 0UT review.
Les Constable is preparing an inspection plan for fire protection issues.
Tom Westerman will prepare an inspection plan for engineering e
backlog issues.
New Items:
Panel members will provide restart action plan e
comments / concurrence by noon on 10/8/93.
DRP will discuss the inspection schedule with the licensee to determine whether the licensee will be ready for inspection by the scheduled dates.
- c.
l effectiveness in identifying, pursuing, and correcting plant problems," should be a part of each restart inspection plan.
l-e DRP will issue Inspection Report 93-31 to document DET and other l
restart issues.
DRP will discuss the draft inspection plan with DRIL on October 6 e
to select appropriate dates for the inspection and to determine which MC 0350 checklist items will be covered in the ORAT inspection.
I e
DRP will prepare a second supplement to the CAL.
i e
DRP will define the documents to be collected and maintained in the MC 0350 file.
l DRP will contact Region 11 to set up a conference call to discuss e
the restart process used for Region II plants.
DRP will brief the Regional Administrator on the results of the October 5 meetings.
DRP will draft, for the ED0's signature, a final response to the licensee's response to the Diagnostic Evaluation Report after reviewing the licensee's Business Plan. DRP will coordinate the response with AE00.
DRP will identify a preliminary schedule for the completion of e
Restart Action Plan checklist items that are still open and are not addressed by the ORAT or identified restart inspections.
Panel members will review the licensee's Business Plan and discuss l
comments at the October 28 Panel meeting.
DRS will determine the need for a contractor to participate in the e
SDG restart inspection.
The Panel Chairman will provide input to the NRC restart review e
schedule, re:
internal and external briefings.
l l
I t
l l
i l
l' i
t
STP REVIEW PANEL MEETING NOTES - OCTOBER 14, 1993 ATTENDEES S. Collins, Director, DRS A. Howell, Acting Deputy Director, DRP S. Black, Director, Project Directorate IV-2, NRR W. Johnson, Chief, Project Section A D. Loveless, Senior Resident Inspector T. McKernon, Reactor Inspector M. Satorius, Project Engineer S. Wittenberg, Reactor Engineer Intern, NRR Panel Members Participated Via Telecon PANEL SUBJECTS CAL Supplement 2 The panel discussed whether tornado damper issues should be included in the CAL supplement and in the Restart Action Plan as a startup issue.
The tornado damper issues stem from DET concerns. Although not documented in the DET report, the issues were included in the ED0 staff actions memo following the DET. The generic aspects of the issue do not i
have high safety significance and do not need to be resolved prior to restart of STP. We do need to verify that the licensee's testing of the tornado dampers was adequate to provide confidence of operability of the dampers prior to restart.
Information gathered during the Region IV inspection will be provided to NRR for consideration during the longer term review of the generic issues involving the need for periodic dam;;er testing and whether technical specification damper motion testing requirements should be established.
Regional Inspection Planning i
Review of tornado damper testing will be scheduled for 11/01/93.
i Manual Chapter 0350 i
DRP reviewed the 09/30/93 revision of MC 0350, "Staf f Guidelines for j
Restart Approval," against the previous version and the draft Restart j
Action Plan.
The revision incorporates requirements for tracking and documenting the resolution of restart issues and made minor editorial changes.
The draft Restart Action Plan conforms to the revised guidance.
Draft Restart Action Plan Comments on the draft were briefly discussed prior to concurrence. NRR concurrence is expected on 10/15/93.
l