ML20133F436

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Predecisional Enforcement Conference on 970103 Re Maintenance Rule Program Violations
ML20133F436
Person / Time
Site: San Onofre  Southern California Edison icon.png
Issue date: 01/10/1997
From: Gwynn T
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To: Ray H
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO.
References
EA-96-466, NUDOCS 9701140181
Download: ML20133F436 (36)
v • d • e


Text

. . _ - . ~ . . . - .. . - ~ . - - - . . - . .- . . - -

i

$ e k gDR "'Gug UNITED STATES 5

[ . I *. ' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

, REGloN tv S' f 611 RYAN PLAZA drive.sulit 400

%,,, +...8 AR LINGToN, TEXAS 76011 8064 JAN I 01997 EA 96 466 Harold B. Ray, Executive Vice President Southern California Edison Co.

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station P.O. Box 128 San Clemente, California 92674-0128

SUBJECT:

PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE TO DISCUSS APPARENT MAINTENANCE RULE PROGRAM VIOLATIONS

Dear Mr. Ray:

This refers to the meeting conducted in the Region IV office on January 3,1997. This meeting related to three apparent violations of 10 CFR 50.65, " Requirements for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants." At this meeting, you provided additional information to allow us to better understand your position and evaluate whether or not violations of 10 CFR 50.65 occurred. You also provided your l bases for contesting the validity of two of the three apparent violations. From this 1 information, we will make a decision, and we willinform you of that decision in separate correspondence.

It is our understanding that, during the meeting, you stated that Southern California Edison will review the Maintenance Rule Program for any structures, systems, or components that were being monitored with inappropriate criteria, such as, the common control room smoke exhaust dampers which were inappropriately monitored at the plant level for performance.

Please confirm this regulatory commitment in writing within 30 days of the date of this letter that our understanding of this commitment is correct.

In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.

9701140181 970110 gDR ADOCK 05000361 PDR

. - .. _ _ - . . . . . - - . _ . - ~ . . - - - . ~ . . - . ~ . . . . . . - - . . - _ -

l J

i

1 l

l Southern California Edison Co. I l

4 i Should you have any questions concerning this matter, we will be pleased to discuss them I with you.

! Sincerely, I

l N as P. nn # rector ision of Reactor Safety Docket Nos.: 50-361;50-362 i License Nos.: NPF-10; NPF-15  !

Enclosures:

1. Attendance List
2. Meeting Agenda
3. Licensee Presentation cc w/ enclosures 1 & 2: l Chairman, Board of Supervisors )

County of San Diego 1600 Pacific Highway, Room 335 San Diego, California 92101 l

Alan R. Watts, Esq.

Rourke & Woodruff l 701 S. Parker St. No. 7000 Orange, Ca!ifornia 92668-4702 Sherwin Harris, Resource Project Manager Public Utilities Department City of Riverside 3900 Main Street Riverside, California 92522 R. W. Krieger, Vice President Southern California Edison Company San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station P.O. Box 128 San Clemente, California 92674-0128

4 Southern California Edison Co. Dr. Harvey Collins, Chief Division of Drinking Water and Environmental Management California Department of Health Services P.O. Box 942732 Sacramento, California 94234-7320 ,

Terry Winter, Manager Power Operations San Diego Gas & Electric Company P.O. Box 1831 San Diego, California 92112 Mr. Steve Hsu Radiological Health Branch State Department of Health Services P.O. Box 942732 Sacramento, California 94234 Mayor City of San Clemente 100 Avenida Presidio San Clemente, California 92672 Mr. Truman Burns \Mr. Robert Kinosian California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness, Rm. 4102 San Francisco, California 94102

.,7-y .,

I

Southern California Edison C3. t
E-Mail report to D. Nelson (DJN) .

! E-Mail report to NRR Event Tracking System (IPAS) j E-Mail report to Richard Correia (RPC)

E-Mail report to Donald Taylor (DRT) s7 bec to DMB (l 1) k l bec distrib. by RIV w/ enclosures 1,2, and 3:

. L. J. Callan Resident inspector j DRP Director DRS-PSB

Branch Chief (DRP/F, WCFO) MIS System Senior Project inspector (DRP/F, WCFO) RIV File

{ Branch Chief (DRP/TSS) M. Hammond (PAO, WCFO)

Leah Tremper (OC/LFDCB, MS: TWFN 9E10) WCFO File i G. F. Sanborn, EO W. L. Brown, RC l J. Lieberman, OE, MS: 7-5H OE:EA File, MS: 7-5H DOCUMENT NAME: R:\SO23\SOO103.cjp To receive copy of docurnent, indicate in box; "C" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copy mthhnclosures "N" = No copy , \

RIV:RI C:MB lE EO /)Ffet{ D:DRR() gg D:DRS J/[/ '

CJPaulk/Imb(p ~

DAPowers yff GFSanborn JDy Q ,y'j TPGwynn/, /(/)

01@/97 01/7/97 01/g/97 01/f/Of( 01//d97[/ ~ , (7 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

' F i f[

> l 140058

l l

Southern California Edison Co. 4-a e

E-Mail report to D. Nelson (DJN)

E-Mail report to NRR Event Tracking System (IPAS)

E-Mail report to Richard Correia (RPC)

E-Mail report to Donald Taylor (DRT) bec to DMB (IE01) bec distrib.. by RIV w/ enclosures 1,2, and 3:

L. J. Callan Resident inspector DRP Director DRS-PSB Branch Chief (DRP/F, WCFO) MIS System Senior Project Inspector (DRP/F, WCFO) RIV File Branch Chief (DRP/TSS) M. Hammond (PAO, WCFO)

Leah Tremper (OC/LFDCB, MS: TWFN 9E10) WCFO File G. F. Sanborn, EO W. L. Brown, RC J. Lieberman, OE, MS: 7-SH OE:EA File, MS: 7-5H DOCUMENT NAME: R:\SO23\SOO103.cjp To receive copy of document, indicate in box: "C" = Copy,without enclosures "E" = Copy withhnclosures "N" = No copy , ,

RIV:RI C:MB E EO /JIFp D:DRR/ fgf D:DRS _ /(/

CJPaulk/Imb(p DAPowers yg GFSanborn JDy6r g ,y'j TPGwynnf, /(g:/

01@/97 01/)f/97 01///97 01/f)/Of{'

01//r)97[/ ~

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY I

.. - . . ~ . . ~ . . - . . . . . _ . ~ . ~ - . . ~ . . . . . - . . - . - . . . . . . - -- . . . . . . . - . . _ .

l l

ENCLOSURE 1 l

ATTENDANCE LIST

1. Southern California Edison D. Breig, Manager, Technical G. Gibson, Manager, Compliance  !

D. Nunn, Vice-President l H. Ray, Executive Vice-President l M. Short, Manager, Site Technical l

K. Slagle, Manager, Oversight )

l

2. Public Observers l H. Marvray, Results Engineering Supervisor, TU Electric l D. Scott, Senior Engineer, TU Electric
3. NRC Personnel i T. Bergman, Operations Engineer, Reliability and Maintenance Section, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR)

S. Black, Chief, Quality Assurance and Maintenance Branch, NRR S. Collins, Deputy Regional Administrator j R. Correia, Chief, Reliability and Maintenance Section, NRR l

'~

J. Dyer, Director, Division of Reactor Projects L. Ellershaw, Reactor inspector, Maintenance Branch M. Fields, Project Manager, NRR P. Gage, Reactor Inspector, Maintenance Branch T. Gwynn, Director, Division of Reactor Safety D. Kirsch, Chief, Project Branch F C. Paulk, Reactor Inspector, Maintenance Branch D. Powers, Chief, Maintenance Branch J. Russell, Resident inspector, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station M. Satorius, Deputy Director, Office of Enforcement G. Vasquez, Enforcement Specialist J. Whittemore, Reactor inspector, Maintenance Branch 1

l I

l l

i

4 ENCLOSURE 2 PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE AGENDA CONFERENCE WITH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON JANUARY 3,1997 NRC REGION IV, ARLINGTON, TEXAS

1. INTRODUCTIONS / OPENING REMARKS S. J. COLLINS, DEPUTY REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR
2. ENFORCEMENT PROCESS G. M. VASQUEZ, ENFORCEMENT SPECIALIST
3. APPARENT VIOLATIONS & REGULATORY CONCERNS T. P. GWYNN. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF REACTOR SAFETY
4. LICENSEE PRESENTATION - H. RAY, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT
5. BREAK (10 MINUTE NRC CAUCUS, IN NECESSARY)
6. CLOSING REMARKS - H. RAY
7. CLOSING REMARKS - S. J. COLLINS l

A- u x, - <s , J . - .a ,

4 4

ENCLOSURE 3 LICENSEE PRESENTATION e-4 4

6 2

4

t i

i 1

NRC INSPECTION REPORT 96-14 EDISON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MAINTENANCE RULE  ;

l

! t i

EDISON / NRC CONFERENCE - JANUARY 3,1997 I

i SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 2 & 3 i

i PAGE1 i

l

PROPOSED VIOLATIONS VIOLATION 1: "The failure to set goals and monitoring requirements for 13 structures, systems, or components that exhibited performance at levels less than the established performance criteria is an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.65(a)(1)."

VIOLATION 2: "The failure to establish performance criteria for the control room smoke exhaust system is an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.65(a)(2)."

VIOLATION 3: "The faifure to demonstrate that the use of standard performance criteria of two functional failures over two fuel cycles for reliability consistent with the assumptions of the Probabilistic risk assessment is an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.65(a)(2)."  :

RESPONSE: Edison believes we met the requirements of 10 CFR 50.65(a)(1) and 50.65(a)(2) i I

PAGE 2

Violation 1:

"The failure to set goals and monitoring requirements for 13 structures, systems, or ,

components that exhibited performance at levels less than the established performance criteria is an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.65(a)(1)." [ emphasis added]

10 CFR 50.65(a)(1) "Each holder of an operating license...shall monitor the performance or condition of structures, systems, or components, against licensee-established goals, in a manner sufficient to provide reasonable assurance i that such structures, systems, and components, as defined in paragraph (b), are

capable of fulfilling their intended functions. Such goals shall be established commensurate with safety and, where practical, take into account industry-wide i operating experience. When the performance or condition of a structure, system, or component does not meet established goals, appropriate corrective action shall be taken." [ emphasis added]

I i

PAGE 3 5

I

Violation 1 (Continued):

i Goal Setting and Monitoring Programs:

1 e Maintenance Rule goals and monitoring requirements were established and were integrated into our existing System Engineering State of the System j Program e These goals monitor the effectiveness of corrective actions e Monthly reviews of system performance against these goals 1

e Quarterly grading in the State of the System Report l

e Monitoring periods were established (12 to 36 months) e These goals are fully consistent with the Maintenance Rule, the Statements of Consideration for the Rule, NUREG-1526, and EGM 96-002.

l t

PAGE 4

L Violation 1 (Continued): ,

State of the System Process Example: Auxiliary Feedwater System Train Availability Grade Criteria - over 12 months 1

A 98.1 -100 %

B 97.1 - 98 %

C 96.1 - 97.0 %

D <96.1 % l:

Train Functional Failures Grade Criteria - over 36 months  !

A 0 B 1-2 Random i i

C >2 Random or > 1 Related D > 3 Random or > 2 Related PAGES

]

i

Violation 1 (Continued):

Safety / Regulatory Significance:

e No actual or potential safety significance i

e Corrective action programs do identify and correct the causes of failures and excessive unavailability

  • SSC's performance was adequately monitored - would have detected '

declining performance trends i

e No " Programmatic Breakdown"

  • Direct links with safety e Established monitoring
  • Effective corrective actions e Strong maintenance performance l
  • Conservative implementation - our monitoring periods are much longer than the NEl guideline PAGE 6

Violation 1 (Continued):

I

Conclusions:

e Edison properly identified goals to ensure plant and system functions are reliably maintained and demonstrate the effectiveness of maintenance ,

activities -

  • Edison properly identified corrective actions e Edison properly identified monitoring and monitoring periods e Edison met the requirements of 10 CFR 50.65 (a)(1) on July 10,1996 i

I t

PAGE 7 l

i Violation 2:

t "The failure to establish performance criteria for the control room smoke exhaust system is an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.65(a)(2)...."

i

, ...(i)he inspectors found that the failure to provide performance criteria for the ,

control room complex smoke exhaust system after reclassifying the system as low risk-significant was a violation of 10 CFR 50.65(a)(2)." [ emphasis added]

10 CFR 50.65(a)(2) " Monitoring as specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section  :

is not required where it has been demonstrated that the performance or condition i l

of a structure, system, or component is being effectively controlled through the performance of appropriate preventive maintenance, such that the structure, system, or component remains capable of performing its intended function."

t i

PAGE 8

i Violation 2 (Continued):

Performance Criteria for the CR Emergency HVAC System:

e Smoke dampers do not serve a post accident function - not risk significant e Smoke dampers are outside those portions of the CR Emergency HVAC system considered risk-significant by the Expert Panel

  • Expert Panel determined plant level criteria were the appropriate means of monitoring the smoke dampers l

l I

t PAGE 9

Violation 2 (Continued): ,

Safety / Regulatory Significance:

e No actual or potential safety significance to identified issue

  • CR Emergency HVAC capable of performing its intended safety function i

PAGE to

. i Violation 2 (Continued):

Conclusions:

e Edison properly established performance criteria for the smoke dampers o Edison met the requirements of 10 CFR 50.65 (a)(2) on July 10,1996 i I

i f

l t

i 1

i i

PAGE 11

Violation 3:

"The failure to demonstrate that the use of standard performance criteria of two functional failures over two fuel cycles for reliability consistent with the assumptions of the Probabilistic risk assessment is an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50.65(a)(2)." [ emphasis added]

10 CFR 50.65(a)(2) " Monitoring as specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section t is not required where it has been demonstrated that the performance or condition of a structure, system, or component is being effectively controlled through the t

performance of appropriate preventive maintenance, such that the structure, i system, or component remains capable of performing its intended function."

l l

PAGE 12 i

Violation 3 (Continued):

Demonstrating the Use of Standard Performance Criteria:

e Expert Panel determined the functional failure criteria was appropriate to demonstrate performance or condition of SSC's was being effectively controlled t

e Assumptions of the Probabilistic Risk Analysis were included in developing performance criteria for availability t

  • Edison believes this is an industry-wide issue. Edison intends to follow the guidance developed by the industry (EPRI Technical Bulletin issued November 6,1996) l PAGE 13

t

.L Violation 3 (Continued):

Safety / Regulatory Significance:

e No actual or potential safety significance to identified issue 4

e No instances where SSC's would have failed to perform their intended safety functions

  • SSC's performance was adequately monitored - would have detected declining performance trends e Direct linkage of functional failures to the Probabilistic Safety Analysis was not a part of the pilot program e October 22,1996 Miraglia letter specifically stated that additional guidance was needed in this area. Retroactively applying the October 22,1996, Miraglia letter to July 10,1996, appears inappropriate i

PAGE 14

2 Violation 3 (Continued): ,

1 i

Conclusions:

e Availability criteria are consistent with assumptions of PRA

  • This is an industry issue. Edison intends to follow the guidance under  !

development by the industry e Edison did meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.65 (a)(2) on July 10,1996, based on the guidance available at the time  :

i i

E r

4 I

PAGE 15

SUMMARY

i i

Edison believes that on July 10,1996, it:

VIOLATION 1: set goals and monitoring requirements for structures, systems, or  ;

components that exhibited performance at levels less than the established performaace criteria in accordance with 10 CFR 50.65(a)(1)

VIOLATION 2: had appropriate plant level performance criteria for the control room smoke exhaust system under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.65(a)(1)

VIOLATION 3: used appropriate methods, based on the best information and regulatory guidance available at the time, to demonstrate the performance or condition of the SSC's were being effectively controlled -including utilizing assumptions of the Probabilisiic Risk Analysis in developing performance criteria for availability i

PAGE 16 L

_ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . __._____m_______ _-__m_____- .-__ -_ _ __.._._ ____ ____ ___ _ . . . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . _ . .

I

. SONGS STATE OF THE SYSTE51 REPORT MS SYSTESI 2ND QUARTER 1996 Main Steam System, MFIV's, MFB V's and SBCS UNIT 2 UNIT 3 rREno NO CHANGE rREnD NO CHANGE A A A A-LAST 4 PERIODS LAST 4 PERIODS SYSTESI LEVEL (consider system A,ati.bitity/Reu.bility eype p r m iers. Grade af c or D or Negative trend regidre comments / Action Pian)

PARAMETER GRA REND CRA REND Mtee Rule Fumtional Failures - ADVs A = A =

Mtee Rule Functional Failures - MSIVs A = A =

AR MM16o: SEE SAP #1 ON 2 MSSVs.

Mtce Rule Functional Failures - MSSVs A = C =

l MSSV Reliability A = A =

Load Reduction A = A =

SBCS Reliability A = A =

l (STEh! PRECURSOR LEVEL l Wonsider Progranunade Para meters and Precunor Pa rameters to System Level Performance. Grades of C or D or Negative trend require comments / Action Pf art)

CRA REND CRA REND MSIV, MFIV, and MFBV performance B = A + 8'As@RiMd'NESyao"eWieTROKAY uE MSSV quarterly stack temperatures A = A =

Percent of traps OOS or failed A = A =

Qtriy IST Valve Perfmc (ADV/MSIV bypass) A = A =

SBCS Performance A = A = SEE SAP #2.

OpenEngineering Actions 17 INSIGNIFICANT CHANGE SEE SAP #3.

8 -

Open Corrective Maintenance Orders 116 + 86 +

i Overdue / Late PMs 0 = 0 =

l N2 REGULATOR ON SKID FAILED,SEE SAP #5.

OpenTemp Mods / Work Arounds 0 = 1 -

Leaks 17 + 10 -

[3%?AR s

^$

d $ LAP TCANTCHANGEFROM Uousekeeping/ Material Condition B = B =

l l -

PREPARED BY DATE 07/29/96 COG ENGINEER JUANARMAS _

REVIEW AND APPROVAL DATE 07/30/96 SUPERVISOR HIRSCH, JOHN

1 SYSTEM ACTION PLAN

- k -1 1

I '

PROBLEM STATEMENT CORRECUVE ACTIONS C P R

.DATE j DURING C7 REFUELING OUTAGE 2 REVISED TECH SPEC TOLERANCE 1 MSSVs AS-FOUND SEIPOINTS WERE COMPLETED LIMITS AND ESTABLISHED PM FOR 1/1/95 OUT OF SPEC.

] REBUILDING MSSVs (AR 960700160).

DEGRADED STEAM GENERATOR INSTALL NEW SE7 POINTS FOR SBCS.

2 PRESSURE CONDITIONS. MAINTENANCE MO 96061001 (U2) AND 96061002 (U3). 8/3/%

1 TOTAL OPEN ENGINEERING ACTION NONE. TOTAL 9 NEW ENGINEERING i 3 rIEMS INCREASED FROM 20 TO 25 (U2 ASSIGNMENTS WRTITEN HIIS NA

"^

16 TO 17 AND U3 FROM 4 TO 8). QUARTER.

NUMBER OF U3 MOs WrrH LEAK 2 OF THE MOs WERE MISS-CODED AS

4 CODES INCREASED FROM 5 TO 10. LEAKS,2 MOs ON SAME LEAK, NA NA i

ACTUALINCREASE WAS 2.

N2 REGULATOR FOR 3HV8205 SKID FIX REGULATOR, MO 96070036.

5 FAILED. MAINTENANCE l >

6/M I

I 1

i 1

e i

i i

.l t_

i i

d

SOS BASIS REPORT PARAMETERS-S:cend:ry Page 15

MS- Main Steam System, MFIVs, MFBVs and SBCS Printed
8/16/96 12:47

$ l

System Level Parameter Order

Mice Rule Functional Failures - ADVs

! Mtco Rule Functional Falures - MSIVs Mtco Rule Functional Fadures MSSVs i MSSV Reiletmiity Load Reduction SBCS Relietxhty

, Precursor Level Parameter Order:

, MSIV, MFIV, and MFBV performance MSSV quarterfy stack temperatures Percent of traps OOS or failed 1

Qtriy IST Vane Perfmc (ADV/MSIV bypass) 58CS Performance Open Engineering Actions Open Corrective Maintenance Orders Overdueltate PMs Open Temp Mode / Work Arounds '

Lerks HC f v"'n% Condition gr Measure Reference Sagig Housekeeping / Material Condition A Subgectrve System Engmeer Ev=W Highest standard B SubrectNo System Engmeer Evaluation Meets W C SutgectNo System Engmeer Evaluation Below W D Subjective System Engineer Eva'uation Significantly below W Leaks Number of items (Morwtor trend) Techrucal Monutonng Reports beoed on AR Incrosemg number = Nogettve Code performance trend. Decreasing number =

positNe pwformance trend.

Load Reduction A Support pient full power Operauone with Maentenance heetory/ Ops log /STA report No impact on plant indicates system "o' loed reductions associated with Main opwating ideeny.

Steam equipment.

C One load reduction associated with Main STA Moming Report / Ops log Below Management expectations Steam equipment.

D More than one load reduction associated STA Moming Report / OPS logs Sigruficantly below Management with Main Steam equipment.

expectations.

l MSIV, MFIV, and MFBV pefformance A As readmgs withm man, and max. values. ORSTREND Ideal goal.

(For Hydraulic supply and dome rwtrogen prosaures)

B Between 1 and 9 roedogs outside of min. ORSTREND Pressure changes dependent upon aree and max. values. (For Hydraube supply temperature and twtrogen dome pressure.) changes C Between 10 and 21 readings outside of ORSTREND Operational Exponence min. and max.

values.

O >21 readings outside of min. and max. ORSTREND/STA Morrsg; Report Operabonal experience values. (For Hydraulic supply and twtrogen dome press.) and/or one or more unplanned T.S. entries.

MSSV Reliability A Aa vanes "as found" within +/- 1 percent IST vane test Operational exponence, of nommal setpoint B- As vanes "as found" within T.S. anowed IST vaNo test Operational experience.

  • as fount values and adjusted to within

+/- 1 percent of nominal setpoint SOS.REPT RP6 (SOS

  • esse Resort Parameters)

1 SOS BASIS REPORT PARAMETERS-S:Cend ry Pye 17 I

MS- Main Steam System, MFIVs, MFBVs and SBCS Pnnted: 6/162 12:47 Gr Measure Reference Basis l MSSV Reliability C 1 or rnore MSSVs outssje T.S. avowed IST vane test Operatmal expenerre j

"as fount values (but +3  !

percent of nominal setpoint l MSSV quarterly stack temperatures A All readings <120 F PRISMS No seat leakage. )

B A2 readings < 140 F PRISMS insignficant seat leakage.

C Sh valves or less between 140F and PRISMS Sk valves are swapped out each outage.

151F.

0 More then six vanes betwu 140F and PRISMS More vanes needing replacernent then l

151F AND/OR any valve > or = 152F. l have spares. High '

temperature requires evaluation for total

    • (

I Mtce Rule Functional Failures - ADVs 1

A 0 Ft,-n 4 Failures (FF) over 36 6 ,.dre STS Availabd.ty Data Sgnificantly exceeds Mtce Rule J Performance Cntena ,

B 1-2 Random FFs over 36 months STS Avalability Data Meets or exceeds Mtee Rule Performance I enterta i C 2 Related FFs or 3 Random FFs over 36 STS Availability Data Below Mtee Ru's P'.srformance Criteria  !

months D >2 Related FFs or >3 Random FFs over STS Availability Data Significantly below Mtce Rule 36 months l Performance Cnteria '

f Mtce Rule Functional Failures - MSIVs A 0 Functmal Failures (FF) o.er 36 months STS Avaitatxidy Data Significantly exceeds Mtce Rule Performance Cnteria .

B 1-2 Random FFs over 36 months STS Availability Data '

Meets or exceeds Mtce Rule Performance criteria C 2 Related FFs or 3 Random FFs over 36 STS Availability Data Below Mtce Rule Performance Cnteria months l D 22 Reiated FFs or 23 Random FFs over STS Availabiltty Data Significantly below Mtce Rule 36 rnonths Performance Criteria Mtce Rule Functional Failures - MSSVs A 0 Functmal Fe lures (FF) over 36 months STS Availabahty Data Sgrvficantly exceeds Mtce Rule Performance Criteria B 1-2 Randorn FFs over 36 rnonths STS Availabildy Data Meets or exceeds Mtce Rufe Performance Cnteria C 2 Related FFs or 3 Random FFs over 36 STS Availabildy Data Below Mtee Rule Performance Cnteria months D >2 Related FFs or >3 Random FFs over STS Availatxlity Data Significantly below Mtce Rule 36 months Performance Cnteria  !

Open Corrective Maintenance Orders Number of items (Mondor trend) Maintenance Status Reports increasing number = Negathe performance trend Decreasing number = Positive performance trend Open Engineering Actions Number of items (Monitor Trend) Technscal Actm Request Status Reports increasing number = Negatue trend Decreasing number s Positive trend SOS _REPT RPe (SOS Bases Repost Parameters)

, . _ _ . _4 t .

SOS BASIS REPORT PARAMETERS-S:cendtry Page 18 MS- Main Steam System, MFIVs, MFBVs and SBCS j Pnnted: 8/16/96 12'47 l 9I Measure Reference Egig i Open Temp Mods / Work Arounds l Number of it. ins (L-dor trend) Techrucal rnonthly rnorwtormg reports increesmg number = Negebve j performance trend Decreening number = Positive 1 pwformance trend

, Overdue / Late PMs Number of items (Leor trend) Mamtenance Overdue PM Reports increesang number = Nogettve

, performance trend l Decreasing numbw = Positive

performance trend 3 Percent of traps OOS or failed A 0 to 5 percent of normeRy newvice traps Sk month trap survey, pient walkdown, and operational Exponence  ;

are isolated or morning report failed during this reporting paiad.

)

3 8 6 to 10 percent of normally inservice traps Sk month trap survey, plant welkdown, and Operational Experience '

are isolated or moming report i faded dunng this reportmg period.

c 11 to 15 pwcent of normany inewvice Su rnanth trap survey, pisnt weikdown, and Opwationer experience traps we nooisted or rnommo report 4 failed. I D *15 percent of normeuy ineervice traps Six month trap survey, piant walkdown, and Operational Experience are leoisted or failed inoervice traps moming report Qtriy IST Valve Perfmc (ADV/MSIV bypass)

A Zero entnes esther pienned or unplanned STA Mornmg Report Zero entnes into action statement is goal, dunng reporting period.

' Zero unplanned and 1 to 2 planned for B STA Morning Report Equipment taken OOS for cms as part of maintenance Work Wmdow Menegement system.

(expected)

C 1 unplanned and/or 3 to 4 pienned for STA Mommg Report Shows equipment raanhany problems maintenance D >1 unpionned and/or >4 pionned for STAMoming Report Shows serious equipment reliability maintenance problems SBCS Perfonnance A 0 functional fadures per quarter MO history Exceeds endustry standards B 1 funcbonal fadure per quarter MO history Meets industry standards C 2 functional fadures per quarter MO history Below industry etendards O 3 functional fadures per quarter MO history Significantly Below industry standards SBCS Reliability A 0 fh-i fadures per quarter NCR/MO history Meets management standards B 1 functional failures per quarter NCR!MO history Meets hdustry standards C 2 funcbonel failures per quarter NCR/MO history Bekw industr'i standards O 3 functional failures per quarter NCR/MO history Sigruficantly Below industry standards l

l SOS _REPT RPe (SOS seses Report Paramesers;

t NUCLEAR OVERSIGHT - ROOT CAUSE EVALUATION t

. Date: October 1996

. Event Report: AR960901036 Failure to Document Goal Setting

. Findinas on Maintenance Rule Implementation: ,

Schedule compression left insufficient time to document goal setting evaluations 1 Management was late in actively participating in Maintenance Rule implementation  :

Nuclear Oversight's audit of Rule implementation did not effectively communicate the issues with documentation of goal setting t

. Corrective Actions - Assigned -

i E

i i

l ~. -

l EXAMPLE OF CONSERVATISM

! Unit 2 Auxiliary Feedwater mes Failure FF RFF FF i l . -

Date 8/93 10/93 1/94 10/95 1/96 i 11/96 i i

Edison (a)(2) (a)(1) ,i (a)(2)  ;

NUMARC/NEl (a)(2) (a)(1) (a)(2) (a)(1) (a)(2)

Minimum period in (a)(1) by Edison's method is 36 months -

whereas NUMARC/NEl is 6 months.

t t

I i

_ _I

O e SONGS STATE OF THE SYSTEM REPORT AFW SYSTEM 2ND~ QUARTER 1996 Auxiliary Feedwater System i UNIT 2 UNIT 3 i TREND DECLINING TnEnD NO CHANGE A A B ^B LAST4 PERIODS LAST 4 PERIODS SYSTEM LEVEL (conader syst,m Avallability/Reliabnity type parameters Grade of C or D or Negadve trend require comments'Acdon Plan)

UNIT 2 UNIT 3 PARAMETER GRADE TREND GRA DE TREND Train A Availability A = A =

TrainB Availability A = A =

B Eeo rr g ogyggAgAB TrainC Availability = B -

A A8 Wk Mtce Rule Func Failures -Train A A + A =

Mtce Rule Func Failures -Train B B = A =

SEE ANN l'LAN REMS #2 AND F3.

Mtee Rule Func Failures Train C C -

B -

i ISTEM PRECURSOR LEVEL (Consider Programmade Parameters and Precursor Parameters to System Level Performance. Grades of C or D or Negadve trend require comments /Aedon Pla:L)

GRAD TREND GRA REND AFW Turbine Driven PumpTrips A = C = hejF S tS ~^

  • LR Ss Ws GAR 96 AFW Pump Performance C -

A = SEE ACTION PLAN TrEM 24 D SEE ACTION PLAN rfEMS #5 AND #6 AFW Valve Petformance -

B -

Other AFW Surveillances A = A =

Op:nEngineering Actions 6 + 3 -

Op:n Corrective Maintenance Orders 36 + 30 -

Overdue / Late PMs 0 -

0 =

OpenTemp Mods / Work Arounds 0/1 -

0/1 -

Leaks 3 = 0 -

Housekeeping /Matenal Condition B = B =

PREPARED BY DATE 07/30/96 COG ENGINEER JEROME MARR REVIEW AND APPROVAL DATE 07/27/96 SUPERVISOR PAUL BLAKESLEE

, i SYSTEM ACTION PLAN l i

I EST PROBLEM STATEMENT CORRECnVEACTIONS' . COMP -

_DATE-R W  !

1 UNrr 3 TRAIN'C AVAILABILrrY NONE REQUIRED. DIE AVAIL. WAS DECLINED FROM AN'A'TO A'B' PHR 1 REPORTED LOWER DUETO REVISION C i GRADE. IN REPORTING REQUIREMENTS (CONT.) PRIOR REPORTS WERE FOR PHR 1 THE LAST 36 MONTHS. NEW C REQUIREMENTIS FOR ONLY 12 MOS.

UNrr 2 TRAIN'C HAS HAD 3 AR 960601178 STATES THATHIESE 2 PHR FUNCTIONAL FAILURES IN THE LAST WERE UNRELATED AND PROPER C 12 QUARTERS. CORRECTIVE ACTIONHAS BEEN (CONT.)TAKEN. FURTHER 2 PHR EVALUATION WILL BE PERFORMED C j AS AN EEC TO THIS AR.

UNrr 3 TRAIN'C FUNCTIONAL 3P140 EXPERIENCED AN OVERSPEED l 3 FAILURES DECLINED FROM AN'A'TO TRIPIN 3/96. ALL ACTIONS COMPLLTE PHR C

A 'B' GRADE. UNDER NCR 960300555.

ALLISTs WERE SATISFACTORY. 2P140 = AR 960500714, U2C8 g

4 2P140 PUMP INBD AND OUTBD 2P504 = AR 960500929, COMPLETED U2C9 BEARING OIL SAMPLES SHOWED (CONT.) HIGH PARTICULATE. 2P504 4 PUMP OUTBD BEARING SHOWED AN INCREASE INIRON CONIENT UNrr 2 VALVES HV4762, HV4763, AND 2HV4762 = PM 96030140 5 HV4714, HAD ABNORMALOIL 2HV4763 = PM 94051428 U2C9 CONDmONS. MOST SAMPLES 2HV4714 = PM 96030177 (CONT.) SHOWED HIGH THE ABOVEITEMS ADDRESS EACH 5 PARTICULATES AND/ORWATER. VALVE'S CURRENT CONVmON. IN ADDmON, STEC AND MAINTENANCE (CONT.)HAVE SOUGHTTO PURCHASE 5 DE HYDRAULIC OIL IN SMALL 2 GAL CONTAINERS VICE TIE CURRENT (CONT.) PRACTICE OF BUYING IN 5 BULK 50 GAL. DRUMS.

UNTT3 VALVES HV4714 HAD AR960701142TOFLUSH AND ADD 6 MA3 1 ABNORMAL OIL CONDmONS. HIGH FRESH OIL U3C9 1 PARTICULATES.

I t

1

j .

l r l SOS BASIS REPORT PARAMETERS-SIcondity rage 1 AFW - Auxiliary Feedwater System Printed- 8/16S6 12:47

}

Evstem Level Parameter Order

3 Tran A Avalatukty i Tran 8 Av=daMy Train C Avalabehty Mtce Rule Func Falures .Tran A 4

Mtco Rule Func Fadures -Tran B l Mtce Rule Func Fadures Train C

Precursor Level Parameter Order:

AFW Turtxne Dnven Pump Trips AFW Pianp Performance j AFW Valve Performance Other AFW Survallances l l

4 Open Engineering Actions j Open Correctrve Montenance Orders Overdue / Late PMs l Open Temp ModsWork Arounds

Leaks Ha= air- rVije Condson

! far Measure Reference Basis

AFW Pump Performance A O Alert, and 0 Required Acbon 15To IST Records / MOSAIC Sigrvficantly exceeds mTar'=hrwie
B 1 Alert, and 0 Required Action ISTs IST Recorde< MOSAIC Meets avar4aHans, allows for 1 Alert IST j

based on programmatic (norwnetariel) issues.

.' C D

2 Alert, or 1 Required Action ISTs Groeter than 2 Aleft, or Greater than 1 IST Records / MOSAIC Delow expectabens IST Records / MOSAIC Significantly below expectabons j Required ActionIST

! AFW Turbine Driven Pump Trips l A 0 Overspeed tnps over last 24 irwe4 MOSAIC / Operator Logs Exceeds expectabons  !

B 1 Owrspeed trip, for any reason, owr last MOSAIC / Operator Logs Meets =T=r+=hans, allows for one l l 24 rnonths unintenbonal overspeed trip during cutage l 1

retum to service j

. C 2 Overspeed trips, for any rosson, over MOSAIC / Operator Logs Below expectations

last 24 rnonths i j D Greater than 2 Overspeed tripe, for any MOSAIC / Operator Logs Significantly below expectations J reason, over last 24 months I

i AFW Valve Performance j" A 0 Faiures IST Recorde, MOSAIC Sgrvficantly exceeds expectabons B 1 Falure IST Reccrds. MOSAIC Meets expectations s

C 2 Fadure IST Records / MOSAIC Below expectauons l 1 D Greater than 2 Falures IST Records / MOSAIC Significantly below r-r--9 "-:-is l Housekeeping / Material Condition 3

i A SW4 System Engineer Evalueton Highest standard B Subjectiw System Engineer Evaluauon Meets expectauons i C Subjective System Engineer Evaluation Below expectauons

! O Subiectra System Engineer Evaluation Sigrwficantly below expectations 3

Leaks g Number of items (Monstor Trend) Tech.w.e Morutonng Reports Based on AR Increasng Number = Negatsve  ;

Code Performance Trend j Decrossing Number = Posdive  ;

Performance Trend j Mtce Rule Functional Failures -Train A I A l 0 Fu.Gid Fadures (FF) over 36 iredhs STS Avalabsty Data Significandy exceeds Mtce Rule Performance Criteria B 12 Random FFs over 36 months STS Availabdity Data Meets or exceeds Mtce Rule Performance Criteria SOS.REPT RP6 (SOS Bee.e Report Pararreters) j

= - -..

j ,

i SOS BASIS REPORT PARAMETERS-Sacendtry Page 2 AFW - Auxiliary Feedwater System 2, Prtrted: 8/16N6 12 47 i Gr Measure Reference Basis

Mtce Rule Functional Failures -Train A C 2 Feisted FFs or 3 Random FFs over 36 STS Avalabdity Deta Bekmr Mtce Rule Performance Criene
i. rnonths i D >2 Related FFs or 33 Random FFs over STS Avadatality Data Sigrnficantiv Below Mtce Rule l 36 montns performance Criteria f

j Mtco Rulo Functional Failures - Train B A 0 F unctional Facures (FF) over 36 months STS Mtce Rule monthly status report Sagrwficantly meaads Mtco Rule performance criteria B 1-2 Funchonal Faalures (FF) over 36 STS Mtce rtune montNy status report Meets or **aada Mtce Rule performance morths cnterie C 2 Related Functional Fa4ures (FF) or 3 STS Mtco Rule rnantNy status report Below Mtco Rule performance creeria Random Functional Failures over 36 months D Creater than 2 Related Functional STS Mtee Rufe montNy status report Signdicantly Below Mtco Rule Failures (FF) or greater than 3 Random p.Jormance criterie Functional Failures over 36 months Mtco Rule Functional Failures -Train C A 0 FurGri ; Fadures (FF) over 36 months STS Mtce Rule rnontNy status report Sgnificantly exceedo Mtce Rule performance crterie B 12 Functional Failures (FF) over 36 STS Mtee Rule montNy status report Meets or excerdes Mtco Rule performance months crierte C 2 Reisted Functional Failures (FF) or 3 STS Mtce Rule montNy status report Below Mtco Rule p6rformance criteria Random Functional Failures over 36 rnonths D Greater than 2 Reiated Functional STS Mtce Rule rnontNy status report Significantly Below Mtce Rule Failures (FF) or greater than 3 Random performance creeria Functional Failures over 36 months

(~ Open Corrective Maintenance Orders Numter of items (Mondor trend) Mamtenance Status Reports increesmg number = Negative performance trend Decreasing number = Poodive performance trend Open Engineering Actions l Numcer of items (Mon 4 tor trend) Techrucal Action Request Status Reports incrossmg number = Negauve l performance trend  !

Decreasing number = Poodive p.dsan ,c. trend Open Temp ModsMIork Arounds Numoer of items (Mondor trend) Technical montNy rnondonng reports increasing number = Negauve i performance trend Decreasing number = Positive performance trend Other AFW Surveillances A (includog Op.GAis snsPJy, dady, IST RecordsMOSAiC/ Operator Logs Sigruficantly exceeds expectabons weekfy, and montNy survettlances) 0 Fadures B (including Operations shftly, daily, IST RecordsMOSAIC/ Operator Logs Meets expectations weeldy, and montNy survedlances) 1 Fanure C (including Operabons sNPJy, dady, IST RecordSMOSAIC/ Operator Logs Below expectations weekfy, and montNy survedlances) 2 Failures D (including Operations sNftty, dady, IST RecordsMOSAIC/ Operator Logs Significantly below expectations weekty, and montNy survellances)

Greater than 2 Failures sos.REPT Roe ($0S Bas,s Resort Pararneters)

o i SOS BASIS REPORT PARAMETERS-SIcendary Page 3 AFW - Auxiliary Feedwater System Printed; 8/16#96 12 47 l

I fd Measure Reference a Hasi.2 j Overdueil. ate PMs Numoer of items (Mondor trend) Mantenance Overdue PM Reports increesang number = Negatrve performance trend j

Decreening number = Posdive 4

. ..- ~. trend Train A Availability i

A 96,1 100 percent over 12 rnonths STS Avadabddy Data Sgnaccantly avesada Mantenance Rule Performance Cnterie B 97.1 98 percent over 12 rnonths STS Avadsbeity Data Meets or avraada Mantenance Rule Perfennance Criteria l C- 96.1 - 97.0 percert over 12 months STS Avadabddy Data Below Maintenance Rule Performance l Crierte D < 96.1 percent over 12 mor ths STS Aveitabildy Data SWficantly below Maintenance Rule i

Performance Criteria

/ Train B Availability i

i A 96.1 - 100 percent over 12 rnonths STS Avadabeidy Data Sigtwncandy exceeds Mamionance Rule i

Performance Critetta j B 97.1 -90 percent over 12 months STS Avedabaity Data Meets or excaada Maintenance Rule Performance Crterta j C 96.1 - 97 pwcent over 12 months STS Avadabd.ty Data Below %,; r r.c., Rule Performance Crterte 2

0 < 96.1 percent ovw 12 rnanths STS Avadabdity Data Sigrvficantly below Maintenance Rule Performance Criteria Train C Availability - I A 98.1 - 100 p.g ,4 over 12 iie eis STS Avadabdtty Data Sigruficantly exceede Mantenance Rule Performance Crtorie B 97.1 98 percent over 12 rnonths STS Availabudy Data Meets or exceeds Maintenance Rule Performance Crtwta C 96.1 97 percent ovw 12 months STS Availabildy Data Below Maintenance Rule Performance Criteria D < 96.1 percent ovw 12 months STS Availability Data Significantly below Maintenance Rule Performance Critetta t

SOS.REPT RPe (SOS Bases Report Parmeneters)

J

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20133F436&oldid=2881151"