ML20137N431
| ML20137N431 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie, Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 10/18/1995 |
| From: | FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137K821 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-96-485 NUDOCS 9704080357 | |
| Download: ML20137N431 (370) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. .__ _ _ . _ _ . _ . . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ - - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 5 9 i l FPL NUCLEAR DIVISION i l TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR STATION ! ST. LUCIE NUCLEAR STATION 1 1 l k s i MONTHLY PERFORMANCE MONITORING l MANAGEMENT INFORMATION REPORT September 1995 I i , I
- i b l l
i l l l 4 i I M g eAh j Issued: October 18,1995 i ^ go4oegg797o4o2 DINDER96-485 PDR
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\
FPL NUCLEAR DIVISION i 4 TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR STATION ST. LUCIE NUCLEAR STATION 1 i l I l l l i MONTHLY PERFORMANCE MONITORING l l MANAGEMENTINFORMATION REPORT i September 1995 l t i 4 l i ! M i gT 6 . Issued: October 18,1995 i g 40 g 7 970402 DINDER96-485 PDR
FOREWORD : l l l The Nuclear Division Performance Monitoring Management Information Report i presents a monthly compilation of performance indicators which provide a quantitative indication of plant performance. Specific areas of focus include nuclear and personnel safety, plant reliability, and economic performance. The specific indicators included in this report have been selected by senior management as key indicators of operating performance. Summaries of NRC indicator ard INPO indicator performance have been incorporated in this report. 1 Data contained herein will be refined on the basis of feedback from data providers, of continuing quality control efforts, and of comparisons to other data sources. Each monthly report will reflect the best available data. l i l l f I l
I. l TABLE OF CONTENTS i i, PAGE ! PAGE l Forward i i Table of Contents iI B. COST PERFORMANCE Executive Summary fil l Nuclear Division Business Plan Indicator Overview v O&M Budget Vanance - Division- . .. ...B1 CapitalBudget(Non-Fuel) Variance Division. . . . . . B-2 i NRC Indicator rerformance Overview vi Fuels Varianco - PTN . . . .. ... ........ . ..B-3 Fuels Vanance PSL . . . . . . . .. . .. . B-4 INPO OverallIndicator Performance Overview vii inventory Levels - PTN . . . . .. . .... . . B-5 inventory Levels PSL.. . . . . ... .B-6 INPO Overatiindicator Performance Overview Discussion of FPl. Performance Unfavorable to industry Mean v1il C. CHEMISTRY & HEALTH PHYSICS A. OPERATIONS i 1 Operations Highlights. Collective Radiation Exposure PTN. . .. ... ..C-1
.. .. . . ...... ...A1 Collective Radiation Exposure - PSL Equrvalent Availability PTN Unit 3. . . . . .. . .A-2 . .. . . C-2 Secondary Chemistry Performance FTN . . . . .C-3 Equivalent Availability PTN Unit 4. .... . ... .A3 Secondary Chemistry Performance PSL
!. Equrvalent Availability - PSL Unit 1. . .. .. ...A4 . . . . . . . C-4 Solid Waste Disposed- PTN ..C-5 Equivalent Availability PSL Unit 2. .. . . . . . . . . . . A-5 Forced Outage Rate PTN Unit 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-6 Solid Waste Disposed PSL . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . C-6 Forced Outage Rate PTN Unit 4. . . . . . . . . . .... .. A.7 l Forced Outage Rate - PSL Unit 1. . . . . . . . .... . A-8 D. LICENSING Forced Outage Rate PSL Unit 2. . . . ..... . ... . A-9
- l' danned Auto Trips While Critical- PTN Units 3 & 4 . . . . A 10 NRC Violations - PTN . . .. .. .. .... . . .D-1 Unplanned Auto Trips While Critical PTN Unit 31 & 2. . A 11 NRC Vichtions PSL . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. . .D-2 SafetySystem Failures PTN. .. . . . . . . . . A.12 Licensee Event Reports PTN Unit 3. . . . . . . . . . D-3 I l
Safety System Failures PSL . . . . . . . . . . . . . A 13 Licensee Event Reports PTN Unit 4. . . . ... . D-4 Unplanned Safety System Actuations . PTN Units 3 & 4 . . A 14 Licensee Event Reports - PSL Unit 1. . .. .... . .D 5 Unplanned Safety System Actuations PTN Units 1 & 2 . . A 15 Licensee Event Reports PSL Unit 2. . . . . . . . . . D-6 Safety System Performance: Safety INPO Assessment Ratings . . . . . . .. .. . . . D-7 Injection System PTN . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . A 16 SALP Category Ratings . . . . . . . .. . . .... .D-8 l Safety System Performance: High Pressure Safety Injection system - PSL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-17 l E. TRAINING Safety System Performance: Auxiliary Feedwater System PTN. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A 18 Operator Examination Performance PTN . . . . . . . . . .E 1 Safety System Performance: Auxiliary Feedwater System PSL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A 19 Operator Examinaton Performance - PSL . . . . . . . . . .E 2 Safety System Performance: Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailability- PTN Unit 3. . . . . .. . . A 20 ' F. EMPLOYEE SAFETY Safety System Performance: Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailability - PTN Unit 4. . . . . . . A 21 Industrial Safety Statistics - PTN . . . .. . . . . . . . F-1 i Safety System Performance: Emergency Diesel IndustrialSafety Statistics PSL. Generator Unavailability PSL Unit 1. . .
.. . . ...F2
... . . A 22 l Safety System Performance: Emergency Diesel j Generator Unavailabiltty - PSL Unit 2. . . . . . . .. .. A-23 l Fuel ReEability - PTN Unit 3. . . . . ... .... . A 24 Fuel Reliability PTN Unit 4 . . . . . . . .. . . . . A 25 Fuel Reliability PSL Unit 1. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . A-26 Fuel Reliability PSL Unit 2. . .... ... . . . . A-27 Fuel UtEzation PTN Unit 3 . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . A.28 Fuel Utilization PTN Unit 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-29 Fuel Utilization PSL Unit 1. . . . . . . A 30 Fuel Utilization PSL Unit 2. . . . .. . . A-31 Capacity Factor (MDC Net) PTN . . . . . . A 32 Appendix Capacity Factor (MDC Net) PSL . . . . . . . . ... . A-33 Thermal Performance (Gross Heat Rate) PTN . ... A-34 Distribution List . . . . . .. . .. .Z-1 Thermal Performance (Gross Heat Rate)- PSL . . . . . . . . A 35 II R15:02/17/95
l I 1 , i i i EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
l l l DIVISION l
- O&M expenditures through September 1995 were $164.7 million which represented a budget underrun of j
$14.8 million (or 8.2%). The variance is primarily due to: underruns in payroll, overtime, and employee ;
related expenses due to tumover, vacancies, and expenses not incurred as planned; the Nuclear Division 1 O&M Contingency not yet needed; and, salvage, sales tax, and miscellaneous recoveries at St. Lucie.
)
YTD O&M budget performance variances are stratified as follows: Turkey Point Site Soecific $ 2.2 million (or 2.7%) below budget ; St. Lucie Site Soecific $ 6.7 million (or 9.3%) below budget Other Nuclear Division $ 5.9 million (or 23.7%) below budget
- Capital expenditures through September 1995 were $24.0 million. This represented a budget underrun of l
$18.0 million (or 42.8%). The variance was primarily due to: underrun in Contractor Wrap-Up insurance due to credits received for payment of claims fully reserved plus a credit for transfer of reserves from l Capital to O&M; scope reductions at Turkey Point for miscellaneous plant projects; and an underrun in the steam generator replacement project at St. Lucie.
Y-T D Capital budget performance variances are stratified as follows: Turkev Point Site Soecific $ 2.3 million (or 28.9%) below budget St. Lucie Site Soecific $ 8.3 million (or 30.6%) below budget Other Nuclear Division S 7.4 million (or 105.8%) below budget PLANT & STAFF
- Turkey Point reported no NRC Violations through September 1995.
- St. Lucie reported seven NRC Violations in September.
#95-15 Failure to Follow Procedures and Block MSIS Actuation. Exit Mtg. 9/15/95.
#95-15-02 -Two Examples of Failure to Follow Procedures During RCP Restaging. Exit Mtg. 9/15/95.
#9515 Failure to Follow Procedure and Document Abnormal Valve Alignment in Valve Deviation Log.
l Exit Mtg. 9/15/95.
#95-15 Failure to Follow Procedures During Alignment of Shutdown Cooling System. Exit Mtg. 9/15/95.
1
#95-15 Failure to Follow Procedure and Document a Deficiency on a Containment Spray Valve Test Procedure. Exit Mtg. 9/15/95.
l
#95-15 Failure to Initial Maintenance Steps as Work was Completed. Exit Mtg. 9/15/95.
i
#95-15-07 Failure to Follow Procedures Resulting in Spray Down on Containment. Exit Mtg. 9/15/95.
iii
l 1 Three potential violations are pending further NRC review:
#95-18 Post Maintenance Testing Inadequate on PORV's (Not IAW 10CFR50 App. B Criteria).
Exit Mtg. 8/30/95.
#95-16 In Service Surveillance Testing inadequate on PORV's (Not IAW 10CFR50 App. B, Criteria).
Exit Mtg. 8/30/95.
#95-16 LTOP Operability Tech Spec was Violated by not Having the PORV's Operable When Required During Two Previous Outages. Exit Mtg. 8/30/95.
Year to-date, St. Lucie has received ten NRC Violations. Other plant statistics are as follows: PTN Unit 3 PTN Unit 4 l September Y T -D September Y-T -D l Gross Generation (MWH) 40,977 4,113,062 509,174 4,518,750 Net Generation 37,690 3,918,024 485,159 4,305,824 l Net Heat Rate 12156.4 11079.6 11127.8 11052.8 Equivalent Availability 10.0% 88.8 % 100.0 % 96.9 % Capacity Factor 7.9% 89.8 % 101.2 % 98.7 % , l Auto Trips 0 0 0 0 l Forced Outage Rate 0% 0.7% 0.0% 2.0% I I 4 PSL Unit 1 PSL Unit 2 September Y T -D September Y-T -D Gross Generation (MWH) 0 4,242,020 590,960 5,461,740 Net Generation -11,049 4,001,052 557,750 5,162,684 Net Heat Rate 0 10962.1 11314.4 11108.5 I ! Equivalent Availability 0% 73.0 % 94.0 % 95.0 % Capacity Factor 0% 72.8 % 92.3 % 93.9 % Auto Trips 0 1 0 1 l Forced Outage Rate 100.0 % 24.1 % 0.0% 2.5% iv l
NUCLEAR DIVISION BUSINESS PLAN INDICATOR OVERVIEW (DATA THROUGH SEPTEMBER 1995) 1995 1995 1995 i Indicator Plant YE Y-TD YTD l Target Target Comments Actuals i ' Collective Radiation Exposure PTN s275 113.0 197.6 PTN Y-T D Man Rem was higher in (Man-Rem) PSL s240 122.0 108.4 September than its target ciue to early start of a refuelino outece. No review is scheouled for PTN in NRC SALP Ratings [ 1995; the SALP period at St. Lucie has been extended to Jan. 6,1996. St. Lucie reported 7 NRC Violations l l ' NRC Violations h k
^
3f in Sept; 3 potential. NRC Violations are pending further NRC review. l PTN3 s1 0 4 51 0 No auto trips occurred in Septem-Unplanned Automatic Trips ber. Year-to-date, St. Lucie has PSL2 21 {hpg R 1 experienced two auto trips. O&M and Capital actuals were Budget Performance Capital 64.0 41.8 24.0 ! below Y T D targets in September; O&M 268.3 177.6 164.7 ($ Millions) underruns were mainly due to Div. Total 332.3 219.4 188.7 schedule revisions and project l underruns. PTN3 82.0 90.7 88.8 EAF(%) for PTN Unit 4 exceeded PTN4 95.0 95.0 96.9 Y-T D target in September. Equivalent Availability Factor (%) PSL1 95.0 95.0 73.0 Nuclear Division EAF was 88.4%, PSL2 82.0 95.9 95.0 lower than the 94.1% target. PTN Cap. n/a D 7.4 St. Lucie Y T-D Regular Inventory ' Inventory Levels ($ Millions) PTN Reg. PSL Cap. s 39- p ' 37.9 Levels was higher than the Year-n/a y 242 End Target. PSL Reg. s 40 4 44.6 Production Cost PTN 1.94 1.76 1.50 Production Costs (c/KWh) for PSL (0&M and Fuel) PSL 1.62 1.39 were higher than the Y T D target in i p 1.80 September. 3 Total Cost (0&M, Fuel,and f!bM In September, Division Total Cost DN Div. Total (c/KWh) ran slightly below the Y E g Capital Carrying Costs) 4'08 ) T
' 3'99 target; one planned refueling outage
! O remains. ! Nuclear Division FPL 2237.0 t m i 2139.0 LT tr 4 Total Nuclear Division Staffing Level ! Staffing Levels p7 was below target in September. PTN3 53 ic i 34 Future Refueling Outage schedules Refueling Outage PTN4 NA 1 i 0 are as follows: Duration (Days) PSL1 NA 0 PSL2 53 = dl 0 PTN3 03/08/97 PSL103/26/96 PTN4 03/01/96 PSL210/02/95 Lest Time injuries / Restricted g St. Lucie reported one Lost Time Duty Cases per 200,000 Hours PTN 0.40 gg 0.33 injury and one Restricted Duty Case Wsrked(12 Month Running) PSL 0.40 : 2 0.51 in September and exceeded its 12-Month Running target. v l
I NRC INDICATOR PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW (Data through Quarter Ending March 31,1995) Plant Self Trend Deviations From Peel , Short Term Grou0 Median L0na Term l Performance Indicators Declined imoroved worse Better 0.23 g 0.0
- 1. Automate Scrams While Critical 0.23 m -0.22 g
r 0.39 -0.34 0.68 E 0.18
)
0.0 0.0 0
- 2. SafetySystem Actuations
{77jjjjj ,0 90 0.45 @ 0.0 0.90 0.0 -0.45 0.0 0.0
- 3. Significant Events 0.0 0.0 l 0.0 0.0 l 0.34 0.22 0.0 0.30
- 4. Safety System Failures .30
. o.og {
0.0 0.60 J
-0.08 l
l0.05 0.47 .
- 0.02 l 1
- 5. Forced Outage Rate g o,3o o,og 1
- 0.04 l 0.18 0.14 E 0.0
! 6. Equipment Forced Outages Per 0.56 thANAM 0.27 M ! ! 1000 Commercial Hours @ 0.34 0.0 !
-0.42 0,0 l 7. Cause Codes (All LERs) 10.05 l l l l l 1 l 0.0 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 14 7.a. Administrative Control Problem 0.17 F7 0.42 Performanceindex I 0.0 j 7.b. Licensed Operator Problem " '
0O LEGEND ! 00 1 023 E 0.0 E PTN 3 7.c. Other Personnel Error p f0'0 6 PSL1 7.d. Maintenance Problem 0.30 W O.30 E PSL 2 0.13 E 7.e. Design / installation /Fabricaton Problem 026 E Performanceindicator data are 00 categorized by peer group (9 peer 0.0 groups based on NSSS vendor, product 7.f. Miscellaneous M0.50 oo line, generating capacity, and licensing date) and operationalcondition: I I I I I I NOTE: Radiation Exposure trends are 14 0.5 04 0.5 14 PSL 1 & 2 Combustion Engr'g w/o CPC not provided by NRC; Performance Index PTN 3 & 4-Older Westnghouse 3-Loop however, quarterly values are monitored. (Period 92-2 to 95-1) Vi
INPO OVERALL INDICATOR PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW (September 30,1995) Unit or Station Values Industry MedianValues* l Performance Indicators PTN 3 3 year oistributioni PTN 4 PSL 1 PSL2 l 1995 G als jl pm ss5) Unit Capability Factor (Unit %, 3-Yr. , 83.8*/o 87.1 /o 79.3 % 80.1*/o 79.7 /. Distribution Ending September'95) 80.0*/o Unplanned Capability Loss Factor (Unit 2.5% 4.8% 11.1 % 12.3% 6.0% 4.5%
%,3 Year Distr. Ending September ,95) l l Unplanned Automatic Scrams Per 7000 Hours Critical (Per Unit, 3-Year Distri- 0.3 0.9 1.6 0.6 1.0 1.0 bution Ending September '95) i y High Pressure Safety injection g System (Per Unit,3 Year Distribution 0.008 0.009 .0.025 0.010 0.003 - 0.008 0.020 g Ending September '95) t S Auxiliary Feedwater System (Per 5 Unit, 3-Year Distribution Ending 0.015 0.012 0.010 0.013 0.004 - 0.009 0.025 w
i September'95) l g Emergency AC Power System (Per w Unit, 3-Year Distribution Ending
- 0.003 0.003 0.016 0.013 0.009 - 0.014 0.025 September '95)
- Thermal Performance (Ratio of Design to Actual Gross Heat Rate, 1 Yr. 99.8 % 1002 % 99.1% 98.5 % 99.4% " 99.5% "
Distribution Ending September '95) Collective Radiation Exposure (Man-Rem per unit per year, 3-year running 196 196 181 181 157 185 avg. ending September'95) Volume of Lowlevel Solid Radioactive Waste (Cubic meters per unit per year, 40.0 40.0 58.1 58.1 62.0 # 110 # 3-year avg. ending September '95) Chemistry Index (January through 1.01 1.04 1.21 1.15 1.19 " n/a l September,95) Average , industrial Safety Lost-time Accident Rate 1 (Station rate per 200,000 man-hours worked, year ending September '95 0.32 0.51 0.51 " 0.50 includes Restricted Duty Cases) Fuel Reliability (Unit microcuries/g' month ending September '95) n/a 122E 5' n/a 1.38E-4 Refe enc
, , 5.0 E, 04, ,"* .
NOTE: Shaded area denotes FPL performance is unfavorable to actualindustry rnedian. Source of Industry Data: l
- 1995 Mid-Year Report for Performance Indicators for the U.s. Nuclear Utility Industry US2455 Distribution).
** 1995 Mid. Year Report for Perforrnance Indicators for the U.s. Nuclear Utility industry US4455 Distribution).
*** 1995 Mid Year Report for Performance Indicators for the U.s. Nuclear Utility industry (4S54S5 Distribution).
# 1995 Mid. Year Report for Performance indicators for the U.s. Nuclear Utility Industry (IS212/94 Distribution).
Rev.10/15/95
I INPO OVERALL INDICATOR PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW Discussion of FPL Performance Unfavorable to Industry Median I (September 30,1995) UNIT CAPABILITY FACTOR l (3 Years Ending 9/30/95) l St. Lucie Unit 1. The 3-year running Capability Factor for the unit was 79.3%. Capability loss is attributed to the i following: V1201 Valve repairs from 11/24/92 to 12/2/92 (0.7%); Refueling Outage and extension from 3/29/93 to l 6/17/93 (7.4%); Hot Leg Valve MV-3480 leak repairs from 3/29/94 to 4/2/94 (0.4%); Main Transformer trip from I 6/6/94 to 6/11/94 (0.4%); Quench Tank leak repairs from 2/27/95 to 3/8/95 (0.9%); 1 A2 Reactor Coolant Pump seal ) repairs from 8/2/95 to 8/9/95 (0.7%); inoperable Power Operated Relief Valves from 8/9/95 to 8/17/95 (0.7%); and, I inadvertent Containment Spray actuation and clean-up from 8/17/95 to 9/3/95 (1.3%) 182 Diesel Generator. failure from 9/1/95 to 9/6/95 (0.5%); 1 A Diesel Generator Radiator leakage from 9/6/95 to 9/10/95 (0.4%); and, Code Safety l Vahre repairs and modifications from 9/11/95 to 9/30/95 (1.2%). Other miscellaneous unplanned outages and derates accounted for the remaining 6.1% Unit Capability Factor. l
)
UNPLANNED CAPABILITY LOSS FACTOR (3-Years Ending 9/30/95) l St. Lucie Unit 1. The Unplanned Capability Loss Factor for the three years ending 8/31/95 was 11.1% compared ! to an industry median of 6.0%. Unplanned outages and power reductions contnbuting to this performance included: ! V1201 Valve repairs from 11/24/92 to 12/2/92 (0.7%); Waterbox cleaning due to jelly fish intrusion from 9/18/93 to ! 9/29/93 (0.7%); Refueling Outage extension from 6/1/93 to 6/17/93 (1.6%); Hot Leg Valve MV 3480 leak repairs from l 3/29/94 to 4/2/94 (0.4%); Main Transformer trip from 6/6/94 to 6/11/94 (0.4%); Quench Tank leak repairs from 2/27/95 to 3/8/95 (0.9%); 1 A2 Reactor Coolant Pump seal repairs from 8/2/95 to 8/9/95 (0.7%); inoperable Power Operated Relief Valves from 8/9/95 to 8/17/95 @.7%); inadvertent Containment Spray actuation and clean-up from 8/17/95 to 9/1/95 (1.3%) 182 Diesel Generator fahre from 9/1/95 to 9/6/95 (0.5%); 1 A Diesel Generator Radiator leakage from 9/6/95 to 9/10/95 (0.4%); and, Code Safety Valve repairs and modifications from 9/11/95 to 9/30/95 (1.2%). Other miscellaneous unplanned outages and derates accounted for the remaining 1.6% Capability Loss. l St. Lucie Unit 2. The Unplanned Capability Loss Factor for the three years ending 8/31/95 was 12.3%. Major ! unplanned occurrences contributing to this performance included: Turbine Valve Repairs from 11/24/92 to 12/2/92 l (0.8%); Reactor Cooling System Vent Gas Valve Repairs from 12/2/92 to 12/8/92 (0.5%); 2A1 Reactor Coolant Pump ! repairs due to high vibration from 1/13/93 to 3/2/93 (4.4%); Pressurizer Nozzle leak repairs initiated on 3/2/93 through l' 4/1/93 (2.8%); dropped CEA's on 5/21/93 (0.5%); and, shutdown for auto reactor trip investigation on 4/23/94 (0.3%). Other unplanned outages and power reductions accounted for the remaining 3.0% in Capability Loss. ' l UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC SCRAMS PER 7000 HOURS CRITICAL (3 Years Ending 9/30/95) St. Lucie Unit 1. Increased rate for Unit 1 was the result of five auto tr;ps occurring on 3/18/94,4/3/94,6/6/94, 10/26/94 and 7/8/95. i viii
1 HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM (3-Years Ending 9/30/95) Tur tey Point Unit 4. Average performance was affected due to last year's on-line replacement of t me: ors following dscovery of cracked rotor bars. St. !.ucie Unit 1. Average performance for the last three years was affected by on line Motor O in the 3rd Onarter of 1994 and a breaker failure on 2B in the 1st Quarter of 1995. St. Lucie ll:.it 2. In the 1st quarter of 1995, average performance was affected as a result of Co Water (CCW) Heat Exchange cleaning which placed the respective HPSI pump OOS due to lack of dedicatedi cooling. AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM (3-Years Ending 9/30/95) Turkey Point. Average performance for both units was affected by the B AFW Turbine failure in the 4th qi 1994 due to malfunction of the mechanical overspeed trip device, in the 3rd quarter of 1995, performance was affected by: Part 21 repairs on the Trip and Trottle Valves, and Unit 3 outage work. St Lucie. Average performance for three-years was affected by failure in the 4th Quarter of 1994 of the 1C AFW Pump Govemor in the 3rd quarter of 1995, performance was attributed to: failure of the AFW PP 2C Steam Admission Valve MV-08-13 to open, a mechanical trip linkage for AFW PP 20 when the Electrical Overspeed Solenoid was energized, and a discrepancy between field wiring and plant wiring drawing for the AFW PP 2B. EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR SYSTEM (3-Years Ending 9/30/95) St Lucie Unit 1. Unit 1's average performance for three-years was the result of a high water jacket tempe
'of 1A EDG and failure of the govemor on 182 during monthly surveillance run which closed off fuel to the 1 engine in the 2nd quarter of 1995, and 18 diesel 12 cylinder engine valve failure in the 3rd quarter of 1995.
COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE - MAN-REM (3-Years Ending 9/30/95) l Turkey Point The annual running average Collective Radiation Exposure level for Turkey Point was 196 Man-Rem per unit which was greater than the industry median of 157 Man-Rem. Site performance was influenced by the Unit 3 refueling outage which began on September 4,1995. St Lucie. The annual running average Collective Radiation Exposure level for St. Lucie was 181 Man-Rem per u which was greater than the industry median of 157 Man-Rem. Site performance was influenced by unplanned outa: CHEMISTRYINDEX PERFORMANCE (12-Months Ending 9/30/95) St Lucie Unit 1. Unit l's exceeded target as a result of elevated condensate dissolved oxygen. 4 i
OPERATIONS HIGHLIGHTS (September 1995) OPERATING
SUMMARY
Turkey Point Unit 3. Unit 3 operated at 10.0% Equivalent Availability Factor in September. The unit was shut down on September 4th for a scheduled refuelir.g outage and retumed to service on October 8th. The 34-day outage established a new FPL record. Year to date, Unit 3 operated at 88.8% Equivalent Availability Factor. Turkey Point Unit 4. Unit 4 essentially operated at full power for the month. As of September 30th, Unit 4 had been on line since March 12,1995, or 201 days. For the year, the unit achieved an Equivalent Availability Factor of 96.9%, which is higher than the 95.0% target. St. Lucie Unit 1. Unit 1 remained shutdown for the month of September. The shutdown events and their durations included: Containment Spray System cleanup (1.6 hours); 1B2 Emergency Diesel Generator Rocker Arm Lash Adjusting Nut vibrating loose (123.0 hours); 1A Diesel Generator inspection (109.3 hours); 181 Safety injection Tank Axumulator repairs (25.9 hours); repairs to Code Safety Valves 1200,1201, and 1202 (173.3 hours); tightening of the 1B Emergency Diesel Generator hold down bolts (71.5 hours); adjusting of the 1A and 1B Emergency Diesel Generator Govemor controls (63.9 hours); replacement of 1B1 Reactor Coolant Pump Breaker (2.3 hours); and further modifications to the code safety valves (149.2 hours). Through September, Unit 1 Equivalent Availability Factor was 73.0% which is below its target of 95.0%. St. Lucie Unit 2. Unit 2 operated at 94.0% Equivalent Availability Factor in September. Power losses totaled 43.2 equivalent hours for: Backpressure Control (23.3 hours); Waterbox cleaning (19.7 hours); and Turbine Valve testing (0.2 hours). Year to date, Unit 2 operated at 95.0% which is slightly below the 95.9% target. AUTOMATIC REACTOR TRIPS: No Unplanned Automatic trips occurred in September; year-to-date, two have been reported for St. Lucie. I INDUSTRIAL SAFETY: No Lost Time Accidents or Restricted Duty Cases were reported by Turkey Point for the month. A Lost Time injury occurred at St. Lucie when an employee sprained his ankle. The amputation of I an employee's index finger following a maintenance accident resulted in a Restricted Duty Case. Turkey Point reported two OSHA Recordable injuries and St. Lucie reported one for the month. A1
l' EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY
. Month %
i -o- y.T.o % TURKEY POINTUNIT3 ! W Y-E % 100
~
2 A Y E Target i - hoes Twget s2.tn.l
- 80 - - -
. . . . . . . . . . . A , - nw j e- -
looodl
, z -
l 8 60 - fy -
.........IL.........
m : E""
- a. - e l ly 40 -- - " -
j w - 20 - - - - - ! 0-- - l Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul l Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec j^ EAF% Current Month , , 100 100 97.7 94.2 100 97.1 100 99.5 10.0 EAF% Y T-D 58.9 l 22.3 l 66.3 l 94.6 l 83.5 100 100 99.2 98.0 98.4 98.2 98.4 98.6 88.8 Definitions j Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF) is the ratio of the actual energy production capability to the energy that would be produced operating at full power for the same period expressed as a percent. Equivalent Availabihty provides an indication of the effectiveness of plant programs and practices in maximizing electrical generation. EAF% = Available Hrs -(Eauivalent Unit Derated Hours + Eauivalent Seasonal Derated Hours) x 100% Period hours Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance gepjt, YTD 3 vr Runnino NERC/ GADS EAF 1995 10.0*4 88.8 % 83.8 % 77.8 % 1994 (PWR's) EAF 1994 98.5'A 79.5 % 81.0 % 1994 (All Types) 74.1 % Taroets: 1990 1994 (PVRs) 74.4 % Monthly Y 7 D 1995 N 7% 1990 1994 (All Types) 71.2 % YearEnd 1995 82.0% g Year End - 1994 74.4 % July 1994 July 1995 Medan 82.4 % ea End 1995 87 2% uly Avemge .% Performance Summary Unit 3 operated at 10.0% Equivalent Availability Factor in September. The unit was shut down on September 4th for a scheduled refueling outage and retumed to service on October 8th. The 34-day outage established a new FPL record. Year to date, Unit 3 operated at 88.8% Equivalent Availability Factor. Data Source: GADS Report Targets: Plant Managernent Indicator Type NRC 0 lNPO Corp X Div A2
'l l
- EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY
-O- Y T-D %
TURKEY POINTUNIT4 j W YE% 100_ 1 _ , ,. j A Y E Target - 4 %gg 4 - 80 - . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . lG*d l
* ^
, ,un ,m
- h 6 60{ a, n
"- - -?" - - - -
e l E : l
- y 4o-. .......... .. .. .
I w - c 1 1 i i t 20- - - - .- - l l
--- - - - l 0--
l Year End Year 1995 l Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec EAF% Current Month 100 100 78.0 100 100 96.9 100 97.7 100 EAF% Y T-D 75.7 13.9 85.L 81.1 83.1 100 100 92.4 94.3 95.5 95.7 96.3 96.5 96.9 l l i _ i ' Definitions l i ! } Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF)is the ratio of the actual energy production capability to the energy that would be t produced operating at fu0 power for the same period expressed as a percent. Equivalent Availability provides an indication of the effectiveness of plant programs and practices in maximizing electrical generation. Available Hrs - (Ecuivalent Unit Derated Hours + Ecuivalent Seasonal Derated Hours) l EAF% = x 100%
- Penod hours i
3 ? Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance En XIR. 3 vr Runntna NERC/ GADS i EAF 1995 100.0% 96.9 % 87.1 % 1994 (PWR's) 77.8 % { EAF 1994 91.8% 94.1 % 83.7 % 1994 (AllTypes) 74.1 %
- Tarcets
- 1990 1994 (PWR's) 74.4 %
Monthly Y T-D 1995 95.0 % 1990 1994 (All Types) 71.2 % l
- Year End - 1995 95.0 % g 1 YearEnd 1994 74.2 % July 1994 July 1995 Median 82.4 %
ea End1995 96 4 % 1 Y W } Performance Summary i l Unit 4 essentially operated at full power for the month. As of September 301h, Unit 4 had been on line since March 12,1995, or 201 days. For the year, the unit achieved an Equivalent Availability Factor of 96.9%, which is higher than the 95.0% target. Data Source: GADS Report Tarcets: Plant Manacement Indicator Type O NRC INPO Corp X Div A3
EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY E " "'" '
-O-= Y T D % ST. LUCIE UNIT 1 i EZ yE% "
100 j A Y-E Target [ h l 80-$-""""' "$" '
* " " =
i
- l99o_d.J 3 tg -
A 1 y 60- - - - - - - a n. a 1 40-~ - - - '- ' 6 4 -
- l 20-- - ~ ~ ~ -
- " ~"- - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
l 0- - - - - - Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec f i EAF% Current Month Y" 100 92.9 75.0 100 100 99.5 88.6 2.0 0.0 [ i EAF% Y T D 61.2 l 78.5 l95.4 l 74.0 l 84.5 100 96.6 89.2 91.9 93.5 94.5 96.3 82.0 73.0 i j Definitions i Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF)is the ratio of the actual energy production capability to the energy that would be j produced operating at full power for the same period expressed as a percent. Equivalent Availability provides an j , indication of the effectiveness of plant programs and pracdces in maximizing electrical generat:on. I i 1 l EAF% ,, Available Hrs - (Ecuivalent Unit Derated Hours + Ecuivalent Seasonal Derated Hours)
- x 100%
Period hours W l Statistical Summaty iIndustryPerformance . U E3 " NERC / GADS
- EAF 1995 0.0% 73.0 % 79.3 %
EAF 1994 97.5 % 92.9 % 1994 (PWR's) 77.8 % 82.1 % 1 1994 (All Types) 74.1 % Taroets: 1990 1994 (PWR's) 74.4 % l Monthly Y T D 1995 95.0% 1990- 1994 (All Types) 71.2 % j Year End - 1995 95.0% 1 YearEnd 1994 76.7% g
,uly 1994 July 1995 Median 82.4 %
Yea End 1995 78 5 % 4 4 MS Amge 77.4 % ) Performance Summary ) Unit 1 remained shutdown for the montn of September. The shutdown events and their durations induded: Containment Spray System cleanup (1.6 hours); 1B2 Emergency Diesel Generator Rocker Arm Lash Adjusting Nut vibrating loose (123.0 hours); 1 A Diesel Generator inspection (109.3 hours); 181 Safety injecten Tank Accumulator repairs (25.9 hours); repairs to Code Safety Valves j t 1200,1201, and 1202 (173.3 hours); tightening of the 1B Emergency Diesel Generator hold down bolts (71.5 hours); ' adjusting of the 1 A and IB Emergency Diesel Generator Govemor controls (63.9 hours); replacement of 181 Reactor Coolant Pump Breaker (2.3 hours); and further modificatons to the code safety valves (149.2 hours). Through September, Unit 1 l l Equivalent Availabihty Factor was 73.0% whrilis below its target of 95.0%. Data Source: GADS Report j Targets: Plant Management l, Indicator Type D NRc D INPD Corp Div 4 A-4 i
- i
! EQUIVALENT AVAILABILITY
' Month %
- o y.7.o s ST. LUCIE UNIT.2
! W YE% 100 - , A Y-E Target - E " 1 ' 'E et8% l1s95 Target a2.os l 80- f- . 2Q-."Q- g. ~ . . . . . . . A j _ a n. .
s . IGoodl 5 o 60-. < ~ - - - > --- A- - - 5 -
~
5 40- - - - - '
- - ~ ~ ~
i 5 : I l 20- - 1
~
i - ! 0--
' Year End 4
4 Year 1995 i Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec EAF% Current Month . 100 85.9 99.8 99.0 99.7 98.6 93.8 83.3 94.0 l EAF% Y T D 72.2 l 98.5 l 73.2 l 71.8 l 77.4 100 93.3 95.5 96.4 97.1 97.3 96.8 95.1 95.0 Definitions j j Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF) is the ratio of the actual energy production capability to the energy that would be j produced operating at full power for the same period expressed as a percent. Equivalent Availability provides an indication of the effectiveness of plant programs and practices in maximizing electrical generation. I EAF% = AvailaNe Hrs -(Eauivalent Unit Derated Hours 4 Eauivalent Seasonal Deratad Hours) x 100%
- Period hours Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance Std M 3 vr Runnina NERC/ GADS EAF 1995 94.0 % 95.0 % 80.1% 1994 (PWR's) 77.8 %
, EAF 1994 99.7 % 70.2 % 74.1 % 1994 (All Types) 74.1 % l Tarcets: 1990-1994 (PWR's) 74.4 % , i Monthly Y T-D 1995 95.9% 1990 1994 (All Types) 71.2 % l } YearEnd 1995 82.0% g l YearEnd 1994 76.7% July 1994 -July 1995 Median 82.4 % I Year End 1995 81.3% I *Y * *9' l \ ! ^ Performance Summary i i Unit 2 operated at 94.0% Equivalent Availability Factor in September. Power losses totaled 43.2 equivalent hours ] for: Backpressure Control (23.3 hours); Waterbox cleaning (19.7 hours); and Turbine Valve testing (0.2 hours). Year J to date, Unit 2 operated et 95.0% which is slightly below the 95.9% target. l l 1 1 4 Data Source: GADS Report Tarcets Plant Manacement i Indicator Type unc tuvo Corp Dev i ! A5 i I
FORCED OUTAGE RATE Monin %
- # y.7.o s TURKEY POINTUNIT3 E YE% 100 A Y' E Target
- ,0 ...............................................................
i $ w 60Z - O - 4 cc _
! W 4
m 40 -- . A 36.f %
~
f9.7% g -................A...g.g......... ............................................................... 4 A 7.n
. ga A l tees v4 Terptin j 0
1 YearNnd Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec l MXJt2SE T5!$is3 FOR% Current Month 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FOR% Y T-D 3.8 l 1.2 l 15.6 l 1.8 l 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.7 i
- \
, Definitions.
. Forced outage rate is the percentage of time that the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared to the time
)
planned for electrical generation. Forced events are failures or other unplanned conditions that require removing the i unit from service immediately or before the start of the next weekend. Forced events include startup failurss siid events initiated while the unit is in reserve shutdown (i.e., the unit is available, but not in service). Forced Outage Rate = Forced Outaae Hours
' - x 100%
Forced Outage Hours + Semce Hours
. . Statistical Summaryn % IndustryPerformancea '
.$g,1, M 12 Mo. Endino FOR 1995 0.0% 0.7% 1.5%
FOR .1994 0.0% 1.2% 0.9% 1994 (PWR's) 8.1%
, 1994 (A!! Types) 10.6%
g 1990 1994 (PWR's) 7.6% 1990 1994 (AllTypes) 10.8% Yeat End - 1995 2.3% Year End .1994 5.0% Performance; Summary Unit 3 had no forced outages in September. Data Source: GPIF Repon Taraetr Plant Manacement Indicator Type x nRc D nnpo corp x Div A-6
1 FORCED OUTAGE RATE Month %
-o- y.7.o % TURKEY POINTUNIT4
@ Y-E % 100 A Y E Target -
M
. V
" " " " " " " " " " * * " ~
80 - " " " * " " " " " " " * " " " " " " " " " " " " - "" g 3o{ ................................ ............................................................ m u - 40 E- - 1 l an ' 20 - * ,43s - - - A
~
* @s v4 Tage:2.ss l
^
l 0 Year End
~
D-1.I Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec FOR% Current Month ;Jhi.2MIM%l@##i 0.0 0.0 17.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FOR% Y T D 11.4 1.8 13.2 2.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 6.0 4.5 3.6 3.0 2.6 2.2 2.0 I Definitions Forced outage rate is the percentage of tme that the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared to the tme planned for electrical generation. Forced events are failures or other unplanned conditions that require removing the unit from service immediately or before the start of the next weekend. Forced events include startup failures and events initiated while the unit is in reserve shutdown (i.e., the unit is available, but not in service). I 1 Forced Outaae Hours l Forced Outage Rate = x 100% Forced Outage Hours + Service Hours Statistical Summary . industryPerformance _Sef1 YTO 12 Mo. Endino FOR - 1995 0.0% 2.0% 2.6% FOR 1994 6.4% 3.5% 2.6% 1994 (PWRs) 8.1% 1994 (AllTypes) 10.6% Tarcets. 1990 1994 (PWRs) 7.6% 1990 1994 (AllTypes) 10.8% YearEnd 1995 2.6% Year End - 1994 5.0%
. Performance Summary Unit 4 had no Forced' Outages in September.
Data Source: GPIF Report Tarcets Plant Management indicator Type X NRC INPO Corp r.tiv A7
FORCED OUTAGE RATE E Month % o y.7.o s ST. LUCIE UNIT 1 a y.E % 100 - - - - - A Y-E Target , _' V 80~ " . 2
?;;60h " " " " " " " " ~ " " " " " " " " " " " " " - - - " " " " " "
w o - cc - E 40 -- - - - 20- ' " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " ~ " " " " " " " " " " " " - " " "" - 77
~
ms mm m 1 0 Year-End Year 1995 ' l Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec l FOR% Current Month W@MiddMS' d5i$ 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.4 98.0 100 FOR% Y T-D 16.6 l 1.2 l 3.5 l 2.1 l 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 14.4 24.1 Definitions: Forced outage rate is the percentage of tme that the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared to the tme planned for electrical generation. Forced events are failures or other unplanned conditions that require removing the unit from service immediately or before the start of the next weekend. Forced events include startup failures and I events initiated while the unit is in reserve shutdown (i.e., the unit is available, but not in service). l Forced Outage Rate = Forced H urs Se ce Hours
-Statistical Summary LIndustryPerformance ES21 M 124k. Erdno NERC/ GADS FOR 1995 100.0 % 24.1 % 20.0%
FOR 1994 0.0% 4.6% 3.4% 1994 (PWR's) 8.1% , 1994 (AllTypes) 10.6% l Tarcets: 1990 1994 (PWR's) 7.6% 1990 1994 (AllTypes) 10.8% l' Year End-1995 2.6% __ Year End- 1994 5.3% Performance Summary Unit 1 Forced Outage Rate in September was 100.0% as a result of: Containment Spray System cleanup; 182 Emergency Diesel Generator Rocker Arm Lash Adjusting Nut vibrating loose; 1 A Diesel Generator inspection: 181 Safety injection Tank Accumulator repairs; repairs to Code Safety Valves 1200,1201, and 1202; tightening of the 1B Emergency Diesel Generator hold down bolts; adjusting of the 1 A and 1B Emergency Diesel Generator Governor controls; replacement of 1 B1 Reactor Coolant Pump Breaker; and further modifications to the code safety valves. Through September, Unit 1 Forced Outage Rate was 24.1%. Data Source: GPlf Report Taroets: Plant Management Indicator Type nRc nnpo D corp x ois A8
FORCED OUTAGE RATE l E Month % o y.T.o .j, ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 W Y-E % 100-A Y-ETarget " d , 80 {
" " " - ~ -
-"""""~""""~~""V y 60 " - ""-"""" """ ""--- """" "*"- "- - - - - "
w ., o - 1 tz: I 40 - 7 20 " " " " " " " " " " " " - " " " " " " - ~ ~ " " " """ - "" -- \ l 0
- gg "
m W n-mr..mg i Year End Year 1995 ' Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec FOR% Current Month Ntj"}@9FYt/flTJhi 0.0 11.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.5 0.0 l FOR% Y T-D 10.2 l 0 l 8.1 l 23.5 2.3 0.0 5.6 3.6 2.7 2.2 1.8 1.5 2.8 2.5 Definitions Forced outage rate is the percentage of tirne that the unit was unavailable due to forced events compared to the time I planned for electrical generation. Forced events are failures or other unplanned conditions that require removing the l unit from service irnmediately or before the start of the next weekend. Forced events include startup failures and 1 events initiated while the unit is in reserve shutdown (i.e., the unit is available, but not in service). ed a Forced Outage Rate = x 100% p , Statistical Summary! :IndustryPerformance-Mt YTD 12.Mo Endina FOR 1995 0.0% 2.5% 1.9% NERC / GADS FOR 1994 0.0% 3.4% 2.7% 8.1% 1994 (PWR's) 1994 (All Types) 10.6% Ta ces. 7.6% l 1990 1994 (PWR's) ( s) 10.8% Year End 1995 2.3% f Year End - 1994 5.3% l Performance Summary' Unit 2 had no Forced Outages in September. Year to date, Unit 2 Forced Outage Rate was 2.5%. 1 1 1 Data Source: GPIF Report Taroets: Plant Manaa_ernent Indicator Type x nRc unpo carp x oiv A9
I' UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC TRIPS WHILE CRITICAL l g,Y E,unaTarget TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 5 lGood l en 4_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Y. . . . a. m i t-- 3- - s&. - o . ! e E 2 --- -- -
=
U ~ 1995 Y/E Target f f 1 1 s1 per Umt 1- "A-A -4 -
- - - - ~~~ --- A
\
i i ) 0 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec PTN 3 W 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PTN 4 M 2 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4"R ~ \ .
- Definitionsy b'
An Unplanned Automatic Scram is a non-manualactuation of the reactor protection system that results in a scram signal any tirne the unit is critical. Scrams that are planned as part of special evaluations or tests are not included in this definition. The indicator provides an indication of success in improving plant safety by reducing the number of undesirable and unplanned thermal-hydraulic and reactivity transients requiring reactor scrams. It also provides an indication of how well a plant is operated and maintained.
' Statistical'Summaryd : ~
~
& JindustryPerformanceL Sept YTD 12-Mo Endina lE TncWnit PTN 3 0 0 Trips per 7000 CnticalHours l
i Trips per 7000 Cntical Hours 0.9 3@stMon Med@2 @S) 1.0 1994 Median 0.8 PTN 4 0 0 1995 Goal 1.0 i Tnps per 7000 Cntcal Hours t 0.9 E 09951st Or Perforrnance Indicator Rpt) Ottty Trips Annualized 1.0 Ottfy Trips Per 7000 Cntical Hours 0.8 1995 Year-End Target per Unit si
':PerformanceiSummaryl .
3 -
' ~
Turkey Point had no Unplanned Automatic Trips in September. Data source- Monthly Value Ucensee Event Reports IndIcatorType' ' @NRC [ INPO X Corp X Div l A 10
UNPLANNED AUTOMATIC TRIPS WHILE CRITICAL A EYTarget ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 5
~
M l V l 4- - - - - - - -- -
)
if - 1 is l
- u. 3-O _ ,
a: ! g2- - - - - - - llE D "' 1995 YlE Target Z f f f , s 1 per urut j . .J ,
. . A. . ........g......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....JA 0
Year End Year 1995 l Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec PSL1 0 2 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 PSL2 M 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Definitions i An Unplanned Automatic Scram is a non-manual actuation of the reactor protection system that results in a scram signal any time the unit is critical Scrams that are planned as part of special evaluations or tests are not included in this definition. The indicator provides an indication of success in improving plant safety by reducing the number I of undesirable and unplanned thermal-hydraulic and reactivity transients requiring reactor scrams. It also provides an indication of how well a plant is operated and maintained. l
.* StatisticaiLSummaryn '" 9 W :IndustryPerformance " ^
EtP.! M 12 Mo. Endin ItLPQ Tros/ Unit l Trips per 7000 Critical Hours I Tnps per7000 Critcal Hours 2.3 f99 I a j 1995 Goal 1.0 l PSL2 0 1 tEG (19951st Otr Perforrnance indcator Rpt) Trips per 7000 Critcal Hours 0.8 OtttyTnps Annualized 1.0 l Ottty Tnps Per 7000 Cnbcal Hours 0.8 j 1995 Year End Target per Unit s;1 Performance Summary 1 I St Lucie had no Unplanned Automatic Trips in September. Year to date, two auto trips have been reported: 7/08/95 St. Lucie Unit 1 tripped during Turbine Overspeed Surveillance Testing due to Personnel Error. l 2 21/95 St. Lucie Unit 2 tripped on low A train Steam Generator water level due to failure of the Feedwater Regulating System LevelTransmitter. Data source: Morthly Value - Ucensee Event Reports indicator Type x unC x nnpo x Carp Orv A 11
1 SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES J TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 ! 6 lGoodl 5 - - -- - vs w - i M p 4 s 2 R m m 3- - - - . O i
\
i m g 2- ' *- ' * * * - ** *- l j z s - !
; z ,
3_ . . . . . . . .
..................................................................... i 7..
~
/
/ ' l 4
0 i Year End Year 1995 l 4 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Otr i i ) ouarter J ,,wg a; l
m3 4 0 3 2 1 n w-6 >w
' , - Swc .
l Year End _g-
-PTN 4 4 0 1 1 n 1 ,2" ' ~ ' -
~
~ Definitions i i
This indicator includes any event or condition that could prevent the fulfillment of the safety function of structures ; or systems. Twenty-six safety systems, subsystems, and components are rnonitored for plants that have 1 received an operating Ecense. 7 I e l Statistical Summary- + - :IndustiyPerformance u
- 3rd Running Safety Svdem Failures ,gg, M . igg,,
1st Running 1995 PTN 3 0 0 1 .NBC .Q1T. .M. _i25 1994 PTN 3 0 0 0 1995 SSFAlnit .28 .28 .34 1995 - PTN 4 0 0 0 1994. P1N 4 - 0 0 0 l I l Performance Summary 1 Turkey Point reported no Safety System Failures in the 3rd Quarter of 1995.
Contact:
Tia Hellriegel 246-6791 4
, Indicator Type NRc 0 unpo corp on, A 12
SAFETY SYSTEM FAILURES ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 6 IGoodl 3._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....................................................T... en w - h a 4 E ta. m 3-- - - O cc w - 2 -- - -
- E o -
Z j . . . . . . .
, ........7.......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .........................
/
/
/'
0 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1932 1993 1994 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Otr 4th Qtr Psl1 - 0 0 1 ouarter meopst 2
- e" 0 0 0 Year-End M PsL1 0 1 0 1 0 \ . j, - .
-PsL 2 0 1 0 0 0 Definitions -
This indicator includes any event or condition that could prevent the fulfillment of the safety function of structures or systems. Twenty-six safety systems, subsystems, and components are monitored for plants that have received an opeidnt license. Statistical: Summary < IndustryPerformance . 3rd Runnrg Safety System Failures gr, M ,,iQt,q, 1st Running 1995. PSL 1 1994. PSL 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 g 2 mm 1995 SSF/ Unit .28 .28 .34 1995. PSL 2 0 0 0 1994. PSL 2 0 0 0 Performance. Summary St. Lucie reported one Safety System Failure in the 3rd Quarter of 1995: LER #335-95d}Qjidated 8/22/95. Reactor Coolant System Power Operated ReHeve Valves (and Low Temperature Overpressure Protection System) Inoperable due to Personnel Error.
Contact:
Mike Snyder 467 7036 l
. 1 Indicator Type x nnc D Inro corp oi, A-13
l l UNPLANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS A E YTarget TURKEY POINT UNIT 3 & 4 5 l IGoodl l I
= 4_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
O P - S o 3- ' LL. O 2- - cc w . ' Q3 1995 Y/E Target E f f f s 1 per Unit z 3. 2 . . . .a ..
. .k. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
............................ . .a 0
Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec PTN 3 E 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PTN 4 % 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Definitions: Unplanned Safety System Actuations include actual and inadvertent actuations of Emergency Core Cooling Systems, as well as actuatons of emergency AC power systems due to loss of power to a vital bus (lNPO i definition). i . Statistical Summary , IndustryPerformance k2t .na g 1st Otr PTN 3 0 0 PTN 4 0 0 SSA 1st Otr 1995 Average 0.10 SSA Running 4 Otr Avg 0.41 Istat 1995 Year-EndTargetperUnit s1 Note: Running 4 Otr Average Value annualized Performance Summary Turkey Point reported no Safety System Actuations in September. Data Source: Monthly Value . Ucensee Event Reports
Contact:
Jim Knorr,246-6757 Indicator Type x NRC X INPO Corp Div A 14
UNPI ANNED SAFETY SYSTEM ACTUATIONS A E YTarget . ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 5 l Good l
~
V l p 4_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O i:
< 1 G
0 3_ nunn .n nn n- n nn .nnnnnnnnn n~n . ~ nnn ..n. nnnnn n. l . 4 . u., O
" 2--
q - - - - --- - - - I l E - msa we.i i s , , , - !
*j_
o . . A. . . .j . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
...............A l
\
O Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec ! PSL1 3 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 PSL 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 Definitions. \ l Unplanned Safety System Actuations include actual and inadvertent actuations of Emergency Core Cooling Systems, as well as actuations of emergency AC power systems due to loss of power to a vital bus (INPO definition). 1 ^ l Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance 4 i U E gg 1st Otr PSL 1 0 1 SSA 1st Otr 1995 Average 0.10 PSL2 0 0 SSA Running 4 Otr Avg 0.41 Note: Running 4 Otr Average Value annualized Taget .1995 Year-End Target per Unit: 51 Performance Summary. No Safety System Actuations occurred in September. 1 Data Source: MontNy Value - Licensee Event Reports
Contact:
Mike Snyder. 465-3363 Indicator Type @ nRc x nnpo corp Div A 15
. _. _ . _ _ . . _ . _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ . .
\
SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM l TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 l 0.10 l [a,coi g Y c-e 0.08- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ - " - - - ~ ~ " - - - - - ~~ -- ~~ " - " - - ~ ~ ~ ~ 5:s - E 0.06 - - C. E OR- - 5 - I I 0.02-3 x,,, ~~~
~1 ~ ~~-- - .01s-5 .015 g
. A _ _ _~ ~_ _ _ _- _- _~ ~_- _ ~_~ _~ ~_~ ~_~ yggg_ f_g _ o l
- ~ ' ' "
0 Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1stQtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4thOtr w PTN 3 m - a; . c y .004 .001 .008 Quarter E!NE U
< PTN 4 .004 .001 .007 Year-End m3 .002 019 .002 .0 M 010 g~ ' ~ , m9 , s; %,q. ,
mamm PTN 4 002 000 .001 .012 .012 - -
-+ '+ , '
Definitions l This Safety System Performance indicator monitors the readiness of the Safety injection (SI) System to respond l to off-normal events or accidents. The indicator is determined from the unava0 abilities, due to all causes, of the l components in the system during a time period, divided by the number of trains in the system. The definiton is further explained: comoonent unavailabirrty is the ratio of the hours the component was unavailable (unavailable hours) to the hours the system was required to be available for service. Data is reported on a quarterly basis. l (Known Unavailable Hours) + (Estimated UnavailaNe Hours) Unavailability = (Hours System Required) x (Number of Trains) I Statistical Summaryi - IndustryPerfunnance - 3rd Otr PTN 31995 .008 PTN 31994 .016 lf.Q Unavail2*tv July 1992 June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.003 0.008 PTN 41994 .017 1995 Goat 0.020 IE90t 1995 Year End Target .016 1994 Year End Target .016 Performance: Summary . Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 Safety injection System performance for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was below the Year End target and Industry Median, f , Data Source: Plant Data Books l
Contact:
Carics Melchor 246-6964 l indicator Type nnc x sN90 carp ' oiv A 16
d
; SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE , HIGH PRESSyctE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM l
ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 ) 0.10 1
, , IGoodl 9 k Y I 0.08 - """"
\
! E=
O
~ -""" - " " " " " " " " " " "" ~ " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " ~ ~ " " "
0.06 - C gj - m k .
< 0.04
=!
\
~~""""""* -" * ~ * * ~ ~ * " " * " " " " " " - " " " ~"
1 4 . ! > !3 .023 .023 .023 1995 Tar .023
' * * -' -~ ) h 0.02- E-<
rm - 0 4 Year End Year 1995 l l Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr ) i R PsL1 ,a .+c;. .141 .018 .000 j
; Quarter Psl2 ' N _~ ~~
;N .024 .024 .000 i x 61 .004 091 005 .002 .024 m +
j 1 Year End M sL2 P .016 .011 .007 .003 .008 *
- ~
4' '.n
~' '
i DefinitionsI
^
ij - $ This Safety System Performance indicator rnonitors the readiness of the High Pressure Safety injecton (HPSI) System I to respond to off-normal events or accidents. The indicator is determined from the unavailabilites, due to all causes, of l the components in the system during a time period, divided by the number of trains in the system. The definition is j further explained: comoonent unavailabilitv is the ratio of tne hours the component was unavailable (unavailable hours) j to the hours the system was required to be available for service. Data is reported on a quarterly basis. j (Known Unavailable Hours) + (Estimated Unavaitahle Hours) Unavailability = (Hours System Reautred) x (Number of Trains)
} Statistical Summary: IndustryPerformance ! 3rd Otr PSLI 1995 .000 Unavailabinty INPO PSL1 1994 .058 July 1992 June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.003 0.008 ; PSL2 1995 .000 PSL21994 .010 1995 Goal 0.020 IE9tt 3
1995 Year End Target .023 1994 Year-End Target .023 i Performance Summary i St. Lucie Units 1 and 2 High Pressure Safety injection System performance for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was below the Year-End target and Industry Median. l 1 Contact Cathenne $wiatek 467 7081 Indicator Type NRc INeo corp oiv A 17
I i SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE AUXil.lARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM
=
1 a TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 I 0.20 -
- - l Good l V
1 .r- - l E 0 .15- " " " " " ' ' " " ' " ' " ' " ' ' ' " ' " " ' " " " ' " " " ' " Ell3 - 4
- 52. -
a O.10 -
\
- m .
5 q 1 3p. ............. ...... .. ... .................. ................ ...... 1 < . A A l z _ .04 .04 4
. A ___________ _1_a52-et: en_ _
a
=
.025
- s - x0 t77 , 1 0 ' Year End Year 1995 f, Legend / Period 1990 l19911992 1993 1994 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Otr l rnPTN 3 - 7 k *e
- 09 .003 .021 i+W MM3pg ~; %y?r? - ".004 Quarter
] p7,4 .002 .025 n NPTN 3 .004 .002 .031 .007 .028 ;g, -{ y ,, g
- PTN4 er' . g y g g; r, "g'g. , %.gg
.018 .003 .035 .007 .015 +
e l l
- m : Definitions ' +
f This Safety System Performance indicator monitors the readiness of the Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW) System to respond to off-normal events or accidents. The indicator is determined from the unavailabilities. due to al causes, of the components in the system during a time period, divided by the number of trains in the system. The definition is further explained: comoonent unavailability is the ratio of hours the component was unavailable (unavailable hours) to the hours the system was required to be available for service. Data. is reported on a quarterly basis. AFW Unavailabdity = (Known Unavailable Hours) + IIstimated Unavailable Hours) (Hours System Recut.vd) x (Number of Trains) Statistical-Summ'aryF * / . :IndustryPerformance: F l aclQ2 l PTN 31995 .021 Unavailabihty i JNP.D. PTN 31994 .012 i July 1992. June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.004 0.009 PTN 41994 .013 1995 Goal 0.025 IAmet 1995 Year End Target .020 1994 Year End Taroet 015 Performance Summary. Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 Auxiliary Feedwater System performance for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was higher than the Year-End target and Industry Median as a result of Part 21 repairs on the Trip and Trotde Valves and Unit 3 outage work. Data Source: Plant Data Books
Contact:
W. Raasch,246-6527 IndicatorType NRc InPo corp Div A 18
r SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 0.20 - IGood l E - V is - 5o 0.15-- 0 - b y o,3o; ........ . ....... .... ............... .............................. m - 5 -
- a p 0.05 - ' " " " -
g " ~ ' ' "
= s
- g1 1 g 2d ____________
_13ss,Jage_a22 0 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1st otr 2nd otr 3rd otr 4th otr Z2Psl1 ,~ v .000 001 016 Quarter ' ^
.084 mesL2 .003 .001 Year-End DsL 1 .010 .013 w 007 .018 ,e ~'
7 ,,,;
~
EPst 2 013 .017 .011 .007 .006 IDefinitions This Safety System Performance indicator monitors the readiness of the Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW) System to respond to off-normal events or accidents. The indicator is determined from the unavailabilities, due to all causes, of the components in the system during a time period, divided by the number of trains in the system. The definition is further explained: comoonent unavailability is the ratio of hours the component was unavailable (unavailable hours) to the hours the system was required to be available for service. Data is reported on a cuarterly basis. l (Known Unnvaitab!e Hoursh (Estimated Unavailable Hours) AFW Unavailability = (Hours System Required) x (Number of Trains) Statistical Summary Industry Performance ' 3rd Otr UnavailabiMy FSL1 1995 .016 EEQ. PSL1 1994 .023 Juty 1992. June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.004- 0.009 PSL21995 .084 PSL21994 .004 1995 Goal 0.025 IAGCl: 1995 Year-EndTarget .021 1994 Year-End Taroet .021 Performance Summary Performance of the Unit 1 Auxiliary Feedwater System for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was below the Year-End target but higher than tne industry Median. St. Lucie Unit 2 Auxiliary Feedwater System Unavailability performance for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 exceeded the Year-End target and Industry Median as a result of three events: (1) a discovered discrepancy between field winng and the plant wiring drawing for the AFW PP 2B; (2) when starting the AFW PP 20 with steam admission valve MV 0813, it did not open; and (3) mechanical tnp linkage for the AFW PP 2C inpped when the Electncal Overspeed Solenoid was energized.
Contact:
W. C. Green 467 7038 IndicatorType NRC @ INP0 Corp Div A-19
r-SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
. EMERGENCY DIESEL. GENERATOR UNAVAIL ABILITY TURKEY POINT UNITS 3A and 3B
( 0.20 , IGoodl _s_: _- V g o.33_ ............... .... ..... . . .............. e : a o.,og........... ...........
=! ............ ................. ..... .......
so . 5 g g o.o5_- .............. 2 .030 3 ~
- .017 .015 A
0 g " A
._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _1.s.osInst:jit Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1st Otr 2nd Otr 3rdOtr 4th Otr Quarter . , .001 000 .000 M 38 -. . .
.014 .000 p 3A .000 Year-End .013 20 .007 .000 .007 ,.
" 38 .016 .000 .000 .002 003 2 -
Definitions Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) performance is the sum of the unavailabilities, due to all causes. of the emergency generator in the system during a time period, divided by the number of hours the system was required for service. The emergency AC power system is monitored at the train level. That is, unavailable hours are recorded only when the emergency generator train is unavailable to deliver emergency AC power. The indicator value is calculated by averaging the individual EDG Unavailability values for the two EDG's at the site. , l Value for each EDG = (Kn wn Unavailable Hours) + (Estimated Unavailable Hours) (Hours System Recuired) Statistical: Summary -
;IndustryPerformance.
SrTE TOTALS 3rd Qtt 4 Otr Movina Ava EDG Unavailabihty 1995 .000 .004 EDG Unavailabiltf1994 .006 .004 July 1992-June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.009 0.014 Intggt 1995 Goal 0.025 1995 Year-End Target .015 1994 Year-End Target .015 Performance Summary Turkey Point 3A and 3B Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailability performance for the 3rd Ouarter of 1995 was below the Year-End target and industry Median. Data Source: Plant Data Books Contact D Tomaszewski.246-6158 IndicatorType NRc Inpo carp Div A-20
SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNAVAILABILITY TURKEY POINT UNITS 4A and 4B 0.20
- IGoodl
.y y
j! 0.15 - -
- a ,
, = - 2 - t b 0.10h a i m - 1 < l l w l $ z 0.05- ' " ".030 025 3 ~
^A .017 .015
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _1951 e:31!. A 4
== mm ,,
i 0 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1st Qtr 2nd Otr 3rd Qtr 4thOtr Quarter 48 5YM* r ' < WW' .000 .005 .000 l Year End 4A rua 000 .001 .002 m > g* 4.q m .j >
,,; g y" g
- 48 rVa .008 .001 .002 .010 'W'A
; Definitions .
l Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) performance is the sum of tne unavailabilities, due to all causes, of the emergency generator in the system during a time period, divided by the number of hours the system was required for j service. The emergency AC power system is monitored at the train level. That is, unavailable hours are recorded only when the emergency generator train is unavailable to deliver emergency AC power. The indicator value is calculated ; l by averaging the individual EDG Unavailability values for the two EDG's on each site. l l i alue for ead E[ " (Known (Hours Unavailable System Reauired Hours) + (Estimated Unavaila Statistical Summary - - IndustryPerformance SCON 3.ClLQ1t 4 OttMovina Ava EiED- Unavaitahility EDG Unavailability 1995 .000 .002 EDG Unavailability 1994 .005 .006 Jtdy1992 June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.009 0.014 TA:get: 1995 Goal 0.025 t 1995 Year-EndTarget .015 l 1994 Year EndTarget .015 > \ . Performance Summary; l Turkey Point 4A and 4B Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailability performance for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was below the Year End target and Industry Median, i
. Data Source: Plant Data Books
Contact:
D Tomaszewski 246-6158 ] IndicatorType unc supo carp Div A 21
SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
. EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNAVAILABILITY 1
r i ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 A and 1B l l 0.20 i looodl V 3 I E 0.15- *- g - i a - E. - 1 5 0.10 - - - -
=!
m . 5 - E - R 0.05-5 - 023 W 08 0 i f ______ __ _ 1_$$5Tarsat:3 15 0- Year 1995 Year End Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1stOtt 2nd Otr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr F721 A s
+ .000 .018 .025 Quarter 18 %- 'O "
' - .000 .166 .062 Year End 1A .025 .011 .018 m a g~,
4
,7 '
unsu is .007 .014 .020 003 .008
~
, Definitions Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) performance is the sum of the unavailabilities, due to all causes, of the emergency generator in the system during a tinie period, divided by the number of hours the system was required for service. The emergency AC power system is monitored at the train level. That is, unavailable hours are recorded only when the emergency generator train is unavailable to deliver emergency AC power. The indicator value is calculated by averaging the individual EDG Unavailability values for the two EDG's on each unit.
(Known Unavailable Hours) + (Estimated Unavailable Hours) Value for each EDG = (Hours System Reauired)
- Statistical Summary . . :industryPerformance Site Totals 331,Qg 4 OtrMovino Ava Unavailability R
EDG Unavailabilq 1995 .044 .035 EDG Unavailability 1994 .012 .009 July 1992 June 1995 Median (PWR) 0.009-0.014 1995 Goal 0.025 g 1995 Year-End Target .016 1994 Year-End Target .016 Performance Summary St. Lucie Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailability performance for the 3rd Quarter of 1995 was above the Year-End target and industry Median as a result of a failure of 1B Diesel 12 cylinder Engine Vaive. l l Contact R. L Kulavich 467 7080 Indicator Type unc @ anno corp oiv A 22
1 I . l SAFETY SYSTEM PERFORMANCE EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR UNAVAILABILITY ST. LUCIE UNITS 2A and 2B 0.20 [ l Good l U (li 0.15h " ' " " ' " ' " - ' ' " ' " " " ' " " ' " ' " ' ' ' " " " ' "
= -
- 9. -
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ~ " ' ' ' ' ' ' ' -
f 0.10k is . 1 2 : g o.o5._ ...................g.. ..............................................
\
I $ - .o23 2
$E cmm s ==
- - - - - - - _ - _ _ _ _ _11851erge 31s_
l 0 Year-Erid Year 1995 i Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1st otr 2nd otr 3rd otr 4th otr I 2 000 000 Quarter 28
,7- ' N 3: %p ,
~
.003 .000 .000 n x i 2A .012 ,017 .005 .005 .053 Yw EM s ., . _ 4g MSE -Jw W ,
28 .011 .020 .010 007 .006 -
- Definitions Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) performance is the sum of the unavailabiEties, due to all causes, of N. mergency I l generator in the system during a time period, divided by the number of hours the system was required for ser :ce. The l l emergency AC power system is monitored at the train level. That is, unavailable hours are recorded only when the '
l emergency generator train is unavalable to deliver emergency AC power. The indicator value is calculated by ' averaging the individual EDG UnavaRability values for the two EDG's on each unit. I hwn UnanHa e H um Mrnajed UnannaNe Houm) l Value for each EDG = (Hours System Reauired) ] Statistical:SummaryL ', IndustryPerformance. ! StrE TOTALS 3rdOtt 4 Ott Movino Ava Egg. UnavnHahav EDG Unavailability 1995 .000 .026 EDG. Unavailability 1994 .008 .009 July 1992 June 1995Medan(PWR) 0.009 0.014 1821: 1995 Goal 0.025 1995 Year End Target .016 1994YearEndTarget .016
- Performance Summery Units 2A and 2B Emergency Diesel Generator Unavailability performance for the 3rd Quarter c' 1995 was below the Year-End target and industry Median.
l i l i
Contact:
R. L Kulavich 467 7080 l l l Indicator Type ' nnc lupo corp Div 1 l A 23 l l l
FUEL RELIABILITY I - mem onut EZ2 Past Cycle x Outage TURKEY P0lNT UNIT 3 xx esi esis" CYCLE 14 1E-00 g E IGood l 2 3g.o33 E
.y ...
O ....... ..... ..... . .. ... . . ...... . ...... .............. l y ,g42 :g .1995Iarget.1,5E:23 ! ? 1E 03 g~ - - - - - .- - - - -- g ,s4- . .. . .. . 1 & 5 fa 1E 05={ ** *
** * ~ '-
? O 3 g.ng " . . . .. . .,....... .. .. .
. a 1D07 Cycle Year 1995 Legend / Period 10 11 12 13 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month ts * 1E-01 g
=
y- . o ~ Y 1 g 1E-02] ........... .. ______.____ * * ' ' 'tes te'et'ues 2 3 g.o33 . .. ............... ........ ........... . ... .. s ! 2 1E 04 - '- ' '- * ** ** . * * ********** ' '' ~< l b a ,,.os E .3 D =
=
B ,eoe 1E47-- - l M Cycle Year 1995 Legend / Period 11 12 13 14 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
-[
'J IM4 154 12E4 iM4 1M4 (EE4 12E4 Month ,
1.72E4 122E4 J 5' ; '
~ ^
334E 03 1mE 03 7.43E44 1.00E 06 DefinIllona Fuel reliability is indicated by the monthly average of lodine-131 actvity calculated from samples taken following at least three days of steady-state operation above 85% power with power variations less than 5%. The lodine-131 data
, is adjusted by correctng for the activity of the naturaDy occurring fissionable material in the zircalloy cladding, and by normalizing to the plant's letdown purification rate. This indicator for Fuel Reliability is a measure of cladding integrity (or fuel failure). All measurements are in 1-131 micro-curies per gram, tigig: If a calculated monthly value for a unit is less than 1.0E-6 microcuries per gram, the value is replaced by 1.0E6 microcuries per gram.
Statistical Summary IndusityPerformance Stol Fuel Reliability- 1995 1.22E-05 E 1994 Fuel Defect Reference Threshold (PWR) 5.00 E-04 1994 Medan 7.36 E-05 1994 Best Quartile 3.00 E-06 1995 Year End Target 54.5E-03 Performance Summary Unit 4 's Fuel Reliabihty conbnues to indicate zero fuel defects in Cycle 15. Data Source: Nuclear Fuel /JPN
Contact:
ModestoJimenez 694-3323 Indicator Type Nnc x nN90 corp Dtv A 25
FUEL RELIABILITY 3
! mum vonm
- - 7' Q '"
XX No Steady state ST. LUCIE UNIT 1 4 1E 00 WM 13
; j l Good l
- , i s.oi , ...... . . .. .... . . .. . . . .... . ... .... . .. . . ..... y...
! B E iE.02 3 J
e g _. _ .nss.Imass 1 1E 033 s 5 2 1E 04 h - E E
;g is.os , . .. .. ...... ... ...... ..... .
D E o w 1E 063 ' i 5 1 [-07 -- - l Cycle Year 1995 Legend / Period 9 10 11 12 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec i j Month _ usa tusa u4s4maa tm:4insa smc4 m a 6.54E 03 5.41E43 5.17E44 1.00E 06 l Definitions i Fuel reliability is indicated by the monthly average of lodine-131 activity calculated from samples taken following at least three days of steady-state operation above 85% power with power variations less than 5%. The lodine-131 data ) 7 is adjusted by correcting for the activity of the naturally occurring fissionable matenalin the zircalloy cladding, and by
- normalizirg to the plant's letdown purification rate. This indicator for Fuel Rehbility is a measure of cladding integrity (or fuel failure). All measurements are in 1-131 micro-curies per gram.
ff;tte: If a calculated monthly value for a unit is less than 1.0E-6 microcuries per gram, the value is replaced by 1.0E6 l i microcuries pe, gram. l s 1 j Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance
.S3.21 LG Fuel Reliability - 1995 n/a 1994 Fuel Defect Reference Threshold (PWR) 5.00 E-04 1994 Median 7.36 E-05 i
1994 Best Quartile 3.00 E-06 1995 Year EndTarget s4.5E-03
)
Performance Summary Preliminary review of rad:oisotopic data and spiking iodine following a reactor shutdown at the end of February indicates the presence of one third-cycle failed fuel rod in the current Cycle 13. Unit 1 was shutdown during September 1995. Data Source: Nuclear Fuel /JPN
Contact:
Modesto Jimenez 694 3323 Indicator Type Nnc nNpo corp oiv A 26
FUEL RELIABILITY
! " ""' Y*
- x out=s' ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 XX No Steady state MCLE 8 j 1E40 g d
5 IGoodj
; g is.oi 3
. ... . ..... ........ ... . .. . . y..
4 i o =.
- } 1E 02 3 ggqq l 52 : 1 2 . .. .......
is.o3i ............................................ .. l
- E E I
1E 04 5 j j iE.Os j . .. ...
..[. . .... ..........
1E 06 - - - 1E 07 Cycle Year 1995 l
- Legend / Period 4 5 6 7 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month jc1 I- '
G L85E4 IJ0E4 WE4 BJsE4 1.11E 4 9J5E4 150E4 4.18E4 1JsE4
] ' 2.01E42 3.71E43 3.32E 03 8.5E 05
- . Definitions
; Fuel reliability is indicated by the monthly average of lodine-131 actvity calculated from samples taken following at least three days of steady-state operation above 85% power with power variatons less than 5%. The lodine-131 data
- is adjusted by correctng for the actvity of the naturally occurring fissionable material in the zircalloy cladding, and by
+ normalizing to the plant's letdown purification rate. This indicator for Fuel Reliability is a measure of cladding integrity j (or fuel failure). All measurements are in 1-131 micro-curies per gram.
- No.te
- If a calculated monthly value for a unit is less than 1.0E-6 microcuries per gram, the value is replaced by 1.0E6 microcuries per gram.
Statistical: Summary' IndustryPerformance i k2! ! LN?.D i FuelReliability 1995 1.38E 04 1994 Fuel Defect Reference Threshold (PWR) 5.00 E-04 1 1994 Median 7.36 E-05 l 1994 Best Quartile 3.00 E-06 3 1995 Year End Target $4.5E-03 l 1 Performance Summary 3 Unit 2's Fuel Reliabilitv contnues to indicate zero fuel defects in Cycle 8. l. 0 l Data Source: Nuclear FuellJPN Ccr. tact ModestoJimenez 694-3323 Indicat'or Type Nnc x INeo carp ois A-27
1 1
- FUEL UTILIZATION Planned ,,,:fC.
Actua' -+- TURKEY POINT UNIT 3 CYCLE 14 500
- Planned Design Energy 457 Effective full Power Days (EFPD)
.: 4-- - >,
- Calendar Days for Cycle 14:473 Days m 4oo =:
m cc.e ,. ..... 9.c n r 455 EFPD's used 2 EPPD's romaning
.-c.a..... '/. ,.
d........ oe w
,o -
. y 3 ; ' 721LI' i'l ~~
zol 300 -5:
- -- ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - " - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ --
o y=
- n. .:
=
4 :. W.L .. msw i a y;s ;94 31,, d 200 =j -- - gs a
. ; gip?
+ -w;n wj J ' . g)p .
=
,y 3oo _;
j.m. ; x- ,j.. . .. m_ ....................... .
% 3..
m
=_. 3 ;
3x w_ , . - - . , g 4
;.,t 1 o
- c. a ,
e
- . , gI O: ,
May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Planned Bumup (EFPD) 11 40 69 98 126 156 184 213 242 269 298 326 356 384 413 442 457 Actual Burnup(EFPD) 8 36 67 98 127 158 188 214 244 272 302 330 361 390 421 453 455 Variance (EFPD)(+/-) 4 2 0 +1 +2 +4 +1 +2 +3 +4 +4 +5 +6 +8 + 11 2 m MGMh5Ny$f pe- e. -,9.mr. MDbyM.m
. m
,wy3p5N$NEhydip.w mm .s w ,mM1h$$
N,bd 5 MNEerv e Fuel Utilization plots the amount of nuclear energy used during the current fuel cycle. The amount of nuclear energy is expressed in effective full power days (EFPD). One EFPD is the equivalent to operating the reactor at maximum thermal rating (2200 megawatts thermal) for a 24 hour period. Planned Energy is compared to Actual Energy Used during the cycle. Fuel utilization is directly related to plant performance. The significance of variance EFPD (+/-) is the difference between planned and actual, this can also be used to project longer or shorter fuel cycle r"ns. a p %3pw. d. ci d h@WWWPfiA9 ( m y y m CyrJ: ha v-xuar 8 as ' wwdmg mupnggUFI5f Oll8 p g 6 T E g R i e g t g 1 in accordance with the October 28,1994 Approved Operating Schedule (AOS), Unit 3, Cycle 14 is scheduled to run ; 484 calendar days (May 19,1994 to September 15,1995) with design energy to run 457 (EFPD) days.
- Per the revised Approved Operating Schedule dated April 26,1995, the unit will shutdown 11 days earlier than ]
previously scheduled. ActualEnergy + CalendarDays = FuelUtilizationFactor
. . . . ~ . . . . . ~..-4.,.. o. m WY,WWW. 7gg!nbYg?$sr=bY$$
y. b, b._$Y5kkY&?h,Nh M5 7~ . Unit 3 achieved a Fuel Uti5zation Factor of 84.7% and operated for 61 effective full power hours in the month of September. For the period May 19,1994 to September 4,1995, the Fuel Utilization Factor was 95.5%. Data Source: 1192 Report Targets: Nuclear Fuel
Contact:
Ed Knuckles 694 3320
.,.-e -: u e, s. ; 3 s M vf 4 Corp h Div n e-AJWId'icator.TypeMb NRC INPO A-28
FUEL UTILIZATION l . Piann.d e i Actual -+- TURKEY POINT UNIT 4 CYCLE 15 1 500 3 Planned Design Energy 445 Effective Full Power Days (EFPD) j Calendar Days for Cycle 15: 460 Days , 7 gh.............................................................................................'./., j;p..... t a :: - s e' l g >U E Mi ) g O -lll .'- " f, l lo ln.s00-l
- 3 2"3 % =;2i;ii,L %,
- =
kJg-smm x o=:D - g"; c- -c
- q.~' . ,
;;471.s
.cys i
.ngg
>= ' - ' '
- e-(s g 200 :: -
d'
$e z% -5 ,
'T,; )e~ l;;', ,L_. d.I'
;ss c . w . -
= g 3oo .g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
, j - 3; ..
9..i ... y n p a s . , i
] ~ ' f-y m -
q j j , 7 g
.~
, 7; , ; ,
0 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Planned Burnup (EFPD) 4 34 64 91 121 150 180 209 239 269 298 328 357 387 417 445 i Actual Bumup (EFPD) 13 42 73 101 125 155 186 215 246 276 306 Variance (EFPD) (+/-) +9 +8 +9 +10 +4 +5 +6 +6 +7 +7 +8 I 1 a g Fuel Utilization plots the amount of nuclear er.ergy used during the current fuel cycle. The amount of nuclear energy is expressed in effective full power days (EFPD). One EFPD is the equivalent to operating the reactor at maximum thermal rating (2200 megawatts thermal) for a 24 hour period. Planned Energy is compared to Actual Energy Used during the cycle. Fuel utilizadon is direcdy related to plant performance. The significance of variance EFPD (+/-) is the difference between planned and actual, this can also be used to project longer or shorter fuelcycle runs. h k $ h h h, h h k h h6 0hYf i $$hhkb$ih$hhkkhhhh The actual Unit 4 Cycle 15 start-up was on November 14,1994,13 days earlier than the November 27,1994 assumption in the October 28,1994 Approved Operating Schedule (AOS). Cycle 15 is scheduled to run to March 1, , i 1996. with a design energy of 445 EFPD. ActualEnergy + CalendarDays = FuelUtilizationFactor
}Q?[l 3$,)Df];ll!hj&&b5g$)5&{;;j((L{h&&f&&
Unit 4 achieved a Fuel Utilization Factor of 100.0% and operated for 720 effective full power hours in the month of September 1995. For the period of November 14,1994 to September 30,1995, the Fuel Utilization Factor was 94.6 % i i Data Source: 1192 Report Targets: NuclearFuel Contact Ed Knuckles 694 3320 tIdd/C8forjype.5 iNd NRC INPO Corp @ Div A 29 r l I
l FUEL UTILIZATION l Planned 4 I Actual -+- ST. LUCIE UNIT 1 CYCLE 13 l I 500 - Planned Design Energy 461 Effective Full Power Days (EFPD) l _:
- Calendar Days for Cycle 13: 475 Days , / ].
! 7 400 : """-""-""""-"""-"""-"-"""""""-""~~-/. -/ - r " "" " o> j7f"c , c, 8 W .E 302 calender says med m ca6 ender days remaining g$ - 5 m sm.ned su res --ning
*I z5 300 ,,"'
~ v,-
fr-2Q;y , . O n. : . 1
,)
1 og }
+______f A.. C '
- W'
' > ' - f"""""" '
y u. 200 - og -. m, e - b !" l
.J k 5
- , ,w^v' '. n ' , .s _ ,
ct . , l og y 2e : ' g p' J i~+<e > 4 4 E? # J
- k. f,M'.
, .,m.
-M Jr r W5 -
100 f ;w
- l
;; _ y 1: J
- . ;/ ] ,"-""
,/ ,;
, n :a ; * #
, i :!; 1 x l
~5
- V~ : '
+ ';- } R, 1 0: , _
1 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feo Mar Apr May Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun l l J Planned Bumup(EFPD) 11 41 68 98 127 158 187 217 247 276 306 335 366 396 423 453 461 Actual Bumup (EFPD) 29 60 86 109 139 170 199 227 227 227
+18 +19 +18 +11 +12 +12 +12 +10 20 49 Variance (EFPD) (+/-)
Yhtkh h ;bbY Y b Y5 Fuel Utilization plots the amount of nuclear energy used during the current fuel cycle. The amount of nuclear energy is expressed in effective full power days (EFPD). One EFPD is the equivalent to operatng the reactor at maximum thermal rating (2700 megawatts thermal) for a 24 hour period: Planned Energy is compared to Actual
- Energy Used dunng the cycle. Fuel utilization is directly related to plant performance. The significance of variance EFPD (+/-) is the difference between planned and actual, this can also be used to project longer or shorter fuel cycle runs,
~w r srw m m m ~ wn W.adi1 ; pwp9qF.e mp?p;dkiWiiMk:}. uelziCycle.0&ww r gMptio+n<s&qyzpw~tywygmy zwamanr pA \
in accordance with the October 28,1994 Approved Operating Schedule (AOS), Unit 1, Cycle 13 was scheduled to l begin operation December 20,1994. This provided for a cycle of 475 calendar days with design energy to run 461 effective full power days (EFPD). Unit 1, Cycle 13 actually began operation November 29,1994 and is currently scheduled to refuel April 8,1996.
- Per the revised Approved Operating Schedule dated April 26,1995, the unit will shutdown 13 days earlier than previously scheduled.
ActualEnergy + CalendarDays = FuelUtilizationFactor bfNkb.NbhIN$N k k Unit 1 was shutdown the entire month of September. For the period of November 29,1994 through September 30, 1995, the Fuel Uthzation Factor was 74.2%. l l Data Source: 1192 Roport Targets: Nuclear Fuel
Contact:
Erwin Wundenich 694-3435 l t
.n , , , ; : : . s .. +
WIndicatorType#g.sp unc nueo carp @ Div A 30
FUEL UTILIZATION l l Planned 22 l Actu : ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 CYCLE 8 500 . + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- __: Planned Design Energy 483 Effective Full Power Days (EFPD
- Calendar Days for Cycle 8: 550 Days / I'
? 400 ~......... ..... . ......... ...s c
s,rn.nnaar o,,,,,,,,24,c wnan,em,mn.,g, e i, o:, en on oom -o umn-one 1i wg m
= <
f B, I
=> jii : /
EE o n-300 ~'-
,4; & '
+, Is '
- = -
. G' . .
iy Og
~j #_? 1 p
- 200 ~ -.i Ig s c.
cc .L ' W tr
=
s e 1 .*- zg' : ,
.W- - Q, 7 ,
u4 -. 7 u
.- ) ,
i W& 3gg f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., &s.g y $- >
, . a 1 em n.
., I #
)Q j
+ 1 Y g" , t & r 0
Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct I Planned Burnup(EFPD) 8 35 62 89 116 142 170 196 223 250 275 302 329 356 382 410 437 464 483 Actual Bumup(EFPD) 2 32 59 87 117 147 178 208 238 269 293 324 353 384 414 443 469 496 Variance (EFPD) (+/-) 6 3 -3 2 +1 +5 +8 +12 +15 +19 +18 +22 +24 +28 +32 +33 +32 +32 y uFS
$ w$ dua N N % s$sDi :m$ w f Mman N E Mw7.QI m M g O R "Sh$. s$fM 5M as, @ m. m@ Y,h e m u#$
$ZDi ns& 2SEM Fuel Utilization plots the amount of nuclear energy used during the current fuel cycle. The amount of nuclear l energy is expressed in effective fuD power days (EFPD). One EFPD is the equivalent to operating the reactor at I maximum thermal rating (2700 megawatts thermal) for a 24 hour period. Planned Energy is compared to Actual l Energy Used caring the cycle. Fuel utilization is directly related to plant performance. The significance of variance l EFPD (+/-) is the difference between planned and actual, this can also be used to project longer or shorter fuel cycle runs.
.. e -
nn .+ n l
@h. .~hNI,$,n 0 n.,n
- . . ;mWFuelft$nie c Ojussfir.)Masumpfl0nsbeby5@:.;@--:na 25EE l Unit 2, Cycle 8, operation is planned for Apr0 22,1994 to October 22,1995 as refected on the October 28,1994 l i
Approved Operating Schedule (AOS). Unit 2 is scheduled to run 549 calendar days with a design energy of 483 l Effective Full Power Days (EFPD). I
- Per the revised Approved Operating Schedule dated April 26,1995, the unit will shutdown 20 days earlier than previously sche @N.
Actual Energy 4 CalendarDays = FuelUtilizationFactor h $ & ' & k* & & @ h 51f C$ h lE$ & h $ & ?k & h f & Unit 2 achieved a Fuel Utilization Factor of 99.1% and operated at 714 effective full power hours in the month of September. For the period of April 22,1994 through September 30,1995, the Fuel Utilization Factor was 94.1%. Data Source: 1192 Report Targets: Nuclear Fuel
Contact:
Erwn Wunderhch 694-3439 i - II d OQpe[$$j NRC INPO Corp X Div l A 31
l, CAPACITY FACTOR (MDC NET) g,[ TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 , ! PTN 3 Y E - 7 I PTN 4 Y-E
/ h lGoodl
"~"N O PTN 3 Y.T.
-o- prN 4 v.T.o 80 - """""a-
- g fg 3 hd!E "- "-
- :: /:a: y/is 7 :s
,s .,f 3 /s.
- =
4 g 30 _ .... , m - 7: /- :- / F e : 3 3! ! 3 4 g 40 _ .j ......... g .. l ,;
. / .. . . . . . . . . . . .
- /! d 3 ! fi 3 s
/
y!. fi -gi . = : p/ 20 - '
- , h : m h e h /m
- /:: /: / <
d M /5 /L / E / =E : O Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month % 104 103 101 94.9 99.9 97.3 100 99.4 7.9 103 101 101 100 100 99.9 89.8 Y T-D % 57.6 l 22.5 l 58.4 97.0 84.4 104 104 105 104 79.0 103 101 97.9 101 97.9 101 2 ' Month % -
- ~1 -
" 105 105 95.7 97.4 98.1 98.1 98.4 98.4 98.7 YTD% 75.1 l 13.7 l 79.3 l 81.483.0 i
Definitions Unit Capacity Factor (using Maximum Dependable Capacity) is the ratio of the net electrical energy generated to the ] product of maximum dependable capacity multiplied by the hours in the reportng period. The maximum dependable capacity is the gross electrical output measured at the output terminals of the turbine generator dunng 4 the most restrictive seasonal condition less the normal station service loads. The higher the capacity factor, the closer the plant is to operating at its dependable energy production capacity. Net Electrical Enerav - x 100% ) Capacity Factor = Maximum Dependable Capacity x Penod Hours Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance Sept YTD NERC GADS Cacacity Factor l 1994 Avg- Ns 76Tip Unit 3 1995 7.9% 89.8% 718% 1994 Avg AllUnits Unit 3 1994 98.0%, 80.2%, 1990 1994 Avg PWR's 72.8% 90 1m Avg M M 69.5'e6 Unit 4 1995 101.2 % 98.7% Unit 4 1994 90.9 % 94.9 % 82.4 % July 1994 - June 1995 Median 77.4 % Targets: Not established July 1994 June 1995 Average ) Performance Summary l Capacity Factor (%) for Unit 3 was 7.9% in September as a result of the scheduled refueling outage; year-to-date, Capacity Factor was 89.8%. l Unit 4 Capacity Factor (%) for Unit 4 was 101.2% for the month and 98.7% year to-date. Data Source: 1192N Report Indicator Type Nac INeo coro O Div A 32
= .._-_. - __ -. . - . .- - -. . . .-
CAPACITY FACTOR (MDC NET) a 73t(( ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 1 PSL 1 Y E _ l m l Good l PSL 2 Y E b
-O= PSL 1 Y T.D
-o. PSL 2 Y T.D 80- "" " " " " - " " """" ""
~
l IE 60 -- - ' '"- " " " " " " - cc
- E 40 - - -
4
- - "" ~~""~~"""
p 20 "- "- " " " " " " " " " 0 i Year End Year 1995 i Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Au9 Sep Oct Nov Dec ! Month % 1.
~
a 102 94.1 74.2 101 101 99.2 86.8 0.3 0.0 $ yTD% 61.1 78.8 96.9 73.9 84.1 102 98.2 89.9 92.8 94.4 95.2 94.0 82.0 72.8 4 Month % '
. 101 85.7 101 97.1 98.2 96.6 92.1 80.4 92.3 Y T-D % 72.4 101.1 73.7 64.1 76.3 101 94.0 96.3 96.5 96.9 96.8 96.1 94.1 93.9 Definitions 1
- Unit Capacity Factor (using Maximum Dependable Capacity) is the ratio of the net electrical energy generated to the J
product of maximum dependable capacity multiplied by the hours in the reporting period. The maximum dependable capacity is the gross electncal output measured at the output terminals of tre turbine generator during the most restrictive seasonal condition less the normal station service loads. The higher the capacity factor, the closer the plant is to operating at its dependable energy production capacity. Net Electrical Enerav ' Capacity Factor = x 100% Maximum Dependable Caoacity x Period Hours Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance YTD NERC G ADS Cacacity Factor S.32t 1994 Avg PWR's 76.7% Unit 1 1995 0.0% 72.8 % 1994 Avg AlUnits 72.8 % Unit 1 - 1994 97.1 % 92.5 % 1990 1994 Avg PWR's 72.8 % a 1990 1994 Avg All Units 69.5 % Unit 2 1995 92.3 % 93.9 % g
- Unit 2 1994 99.8 % 68.6 %
July 1994 - June 1995 Median 82.4 % Targets: Not established July 1994 -June 1995 Average 77.4 % Performance Summary" Capacity Factor (%) for Unit 1 was 0.0% in September as the unit was shut down for the entire month for various 4 repairs. Year-to-date, Capacity Factor was 72.8%. Unit 2 Capacity Factor (%) was 92.3% in September and 93.9% year-tcxlate. l Data Source: 1192N Report l Indicator Type D NRC lNPO Corp Div A 33
THERMAL PERFORMANCE
, (GROSS HEAT RATE)
TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 l 12000 0, v s, c>m-C E c= c= 0E 100%
~
~
' " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~ ' " * ~ ~ ~ ~
11500~ ~ " - ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ - ~ ~ - - ~ - - - 75% g g 11000 ..................................... ....................-..... - -
-- 50%
E2 Co
. 7
. / I J
10500 - / / 7 -7l
-7 ! -- -- -
- 25%
/ : / l / ; -
/
10000- 0% Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec PTN 3 Month -
- tc236 1o3s7 to43s 1o517 toss 7 10710 1o713 tossa 111 1 PTN 3 Year-End ID 10746 10505 10674 10474 105s7 PTN 3 Y-E and Otr (%)O 99.3% 99.2 % 100.4 %100.3 % sess sess se es PTN 4 Month LAN .+ io23s 10343 104:2 to464 1os4s tosas tos7s 10701 iosos PTN 4 Year End " 10641,i10657 10655 10578 10625 PTN 4 Y.E and Otr (%)E l 98.7% 99.0 % 99.7 % 99 7 % 1ac ts tcois se es l
Definitions. Gross Heat Rate is the ratio of thermal energy in Bntsh thermal units produced by the reactor during a given period to the total gross electrical energy in kilowatt hours produced by the generator during the same period.
^
. Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance 12 Month INPO Jgg Runnina Ava BTU /KHR PTN ,3 11181 10525 3994 Industry Average 10188 PTN 4 10603 10521 1995 Target: Ratio of Design to Actual Gross Heatrate (%)
PTN 3 10397 July 1994 June 1995 Median 99.4 PTN 4 10391 1995 Goal 99.5 Performance: Summary Units 3 & 412-Month Running Average Gross Heat Rate was higher than the Industry Average of 10188 in September. Data Source:1192 Report
Contact:
Luis Guterrez,246-7261 indicator Type Nnc x INPo carp Div A-34
l THERMAL PERFORMANCE 4 (GROSS HEAT RATE) ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 1 l 12000 v e GE Om va v- v. v, 100 % ;
. 1
. l 11500 - -- ~~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - -- ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - 1 7ss g .
, 1,x04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................................................ psm, o
!E :
~
10500 -- ~ ~ - ~ ~ - - --
? -
- - ~ ~ ~ ~ - -
'. 2s%
- - - ~ ~ . . .
e
)
3 ggg - E g; Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec PSL 1 Month E -+4 e 10241 10246 1030s 1030s 10362 10431 10474 10665 0 PSL 1 Year-End E./J 10227 10299 10248 10336 10423 PSL 1 Y-E and Ott %)O 99.0% 99.3 % 99.2 % 99.0 % 88 1 s et os os.7% PSL 2 Month W ' 10269 1031s 10314 10466 losse tossi 10703 iossa 10679 PSL 2 Year End G 10270 10165 10231 10579 10466 PSL 2 Y E and Otrf%E 99 6 % 99.3 % 97.8 % 98.5 % sais as as s7ss Definitions-Gross Heat Rate is the ratio of thermal energy in British thermal units produced by the reactor during a given period to the total gross electrical energy in kilowatt hours produced by the generator during the same penod. 1 Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance l 12 Month 3 l 3 Runnina Ava l BTU!KHR j g 1994 Industry Average 10188 1995 Taraet Ratio of Design to Actual Gross Heatrate (%) PSL1 10141 July 1994 June 1995 Median 99.4 PSL2 10141 1995 Goal 99.5 Performance Summary St. Lucie Units 1 & 212 Month Running Average Gross Heat Rate was higherthan the Industry Average of 10188 for the month of September. ' Data Source:1192 Report
Contact:
Ray Riha 465-3092 indicatorType NRc x tuvo O corp oir 1 A-35
O & M BUDGET VARIANCE 1 NUCLEAR DIVISION I 30 IGoodi
- V 15 - ~~-~~~~~~~~----~~~~----
a g 6 - M 0 w _
~
---~~----- - . -
- ---~~~~~---~~~~-------'
--------------------~~-- l
-30 Year End Year 1995
. Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec , 1 349.4 342.4 2952 290A 2852 12.7 27.8 418 614 90.3 97.0 113.8 134.6 164.7 Y T D Actual (sM) Y T D Budgeted (sM) 351.4 333.3 314.6 326.4 302.0 18.9 315 54 2 76.2 93.9 113.4 131.7 150.5 179.5 03 2.7 82 11.0 5.s 311 21.s 15.s 142 14.4 14.5 13.s 10.6 sJ
+Y T D Variance (%)
; Definitions Operating and Maintenance Expenditures include Nuclear Division operation and maintenance expenses associated with direct employees, contractors and consultants, equipment, tools, design, engineering and other items /ac+ivities required to sustain the electrical generation of the plants and to provide required support. Fuel costs, corporate administrative and general expenses, and charges from other departments outside the Nuclear Division are excluded.
Y T-D Actual Expenses - Y-T-D Budaeted Exoenses x 100% = 0 & M Variance % Y T-D Budgeted Expenses i l Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance1 O&M Budcet Sept YTD YTD Variance Actual ($ M) fS M) % IBG Actual 1994 Avg. $297.0M IBG Top Quartile Entry $270.0M O&M 1995 164.7 ($ M) 14.8 ($ M) 8.2% IBG Top Quartile Avg. $ 213.2M O&M 1994 182.1 ($ M) 23.9 ($ M) 11.6% IBG Projected 1995 Avg. $ 284.0M Projection (per dual unit site) derived by trending 1986-1995 Year End Budget 268.3 ($ M) 94 Actual data and 1995 Budgeted data for IBG Group. Performance Summary ~ O&M expenditures through September 1995 were $164.7 million which represented a budget underrun of $14.8 million (or 8.2%). The variance is primarily due to: underruns in payroll, overtime, and employee related expenses due to tumover, vacancies, and expenses not incurred as planned; the Nuclear Division O&M Contingency not yet needed; and, salvage, sales tax, and miscellaneous recoveries at St. Lucie. Data Source: Resource Allocaton(PRA) Nac lupo corp Div Indicator Type B1
4 . CAPITAL BUDGET VARIANCE NUCLEAR DIVISION
- 60 1 -
1I y J. 30 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - o
\
o 0 4 4
----------~~~----------- -----------------------------------------------
j - i -@ k Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Y T D Actual ($M) 195.5 150.7 68.4 90J 75 3 13 3.6 6.0 7.3 9.5 11.7 13.6 1LO 24.0 j Y T-D 8udgeted(sM) 1E1 179.6 75.1 101.4 87.7 5.0 7.4 10 2 14.7 17.7 21.7 2s4 312 42.0 l -@--Y T D Variance (%) to 16.1 3.0 11.0 12.7 80.0 50 4l 44J 50.7 46.4 46.0 52J 4t7 42.s i Definitions - + Capital Expenditures are those oirectly incurred / budgeted by the Nuclear Division for the construction of new utility plant additions and improvements made to increase efficiercy, reliability or safety. Capital fuel costs are excluded. Y T-D Actual Expenses Y T-D Budoeted Expenses 1 x100% = CapitalVariance% Y-T-D Budgeted Expenses Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance Sept Y T-D YTD Vanance ] Actual ($ M) ($ M) % IBG Actual 1994 Avg. $ 63.1M l IBG Top Quartile Entry $ 28.3M Capital 1995 24.0 ($ M) 18.0 ($ M) 42.8 % IBG Top Qucrtile Avg. $ 21.1M Capital 1994 41.8 ($ M) - 24.0 ($ M) 36.5 % IBG Projected 1995 Avg. $ 58.5M t Projection (per dual unit site) derived by trending 1986-
- 1995 Year End Budget 64.0 ($ M) 94 Actual data and 1995 Budgeted data for IBG Group.
i
- Performance ' Summary l
Capital expenditures through September 1995 were $24.0 million. This represented a budget underrun of $18.0 j{ ' million (or 42.8%). The variance was primarily due to: underrun in Contractor Wrap-Up insurance due to credits received for payment of claims fu!!y reserved plus a credit for transfer of reserves from Capital to O&M; scope reductions at Turkey Point for miscellaneous plant projects; and an underrun in the steam generator replacement project at St. Lucie.
; Data Source: Resource Allocation (PRA)
IndicatorType NRc Osupo corp Div i B-2
)
i
FUEL OPERATING EXPENSE VARIANCE TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 ! 30 --
~
l
- 15 - ------------------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
l,
!,E ~_ W_. ,
. : : s 0 0
$ _ M a- _
? ------------------------ -----------------------------------------------. l 30 Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec nta ts.s sis 711 67.6 s.s 113 163 22.3 28.0 33.s 3e.6 4E4 48.s Y T D Actual (SM) Y T D Budgeted (SM) nts 16 3 ss.1 70.0 82.s 5.4 10.4 15.s 21.0 26.4 31.6 as.s 42.3 46.0 3.7 4.4 74 7.4 s.s 4s s.: s.2 7.1 74 7.4 s.1
+Y-T o valence (%) n/a 4.1 h '
+ Definitions:
I Fuel Operating Expenses include fuel investment amortization, interest, and administrative charges for the fuel leases, payments and credits from the Department of Energy (DOE) for spent fuel disposal, and payment to the l Department of the Treasury for Decontaminaton and Decommissioning of the DOE enrichment facilities. Y-T-D Actual Expenses -Y T-D Budoeted Expenses x 100% = FuelOperatingExpenseVariance% Y-T D Budaeted Expenses Statistical Summary U IndustryPerformance ' SeptYTD YTDVariance Actual ($ M) ($ M) % Not applicable. Nuclear Fuel Expense reponed on an Industy beisin miW. Fuel 1995 48.8 ($ M) 2.8 ($ M) 6.1% Fuel 1994 52.4 ($ M) 2.7 ($ M) 5.4% 1995 Year End Budcet 60.1 ($ M) Performance Summary Turkey Point Y T-D variance was due to higher generation (+3.8%) and a higher amortization rate (+2.3%). The increase in Y-T D generaton was due to higher plant capacity than projected. The higher amortization rate is net of: l an increase in amortization due to a design change for Unit 3, which requires the early discharge of eight l assemblies currenty in core; and, a reduction in amort:zation rate due to better actual heat rate for both units.
Contact:
Lorraine Tymrns. 694 3450 j . Nnc Inp0 corp Div IndicatorType B-3
FUEL OPERATING EXPENSE VARIANCE ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 l 30 l - 15 - ----------------------- --------------------------------.......-----... 0 - E - _ N
-30 Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Y T D Actual ($M) n/a ss.7 78.5 64.1 74.1 s.s its 18.2 25.0 31.s 38.3 44.2 47.4 50.5 Y T D Budgeted ($M) n/a si.s 82.1 70.4 67.s s.3 tio 1s.3 24.3 30 3 36.5 42.s das 54.s I +Y T-D Variance (%) n/a s.s 4.3 s.2 s.7 7.s 4.1 c.3 2.s 3.5 4J 3.7 2.s 73 Definitions l
Fuel Operating Expenses include fuel investment amortization, interest, and administrative charges for the fuel l leases, payments and credits from the Department of Energy (DOE) for spent fuel disposal, and payment to the Department of the Treasury for Decontamination and Decommissioning of the DOE enrichment facilities. Ng11: PSL 2 reflects FPL's share only. Y T-D Actual Expenses Y T-D Budaeted Expenses Y T-D Budaeted Expenses x 100% = FuelOperating Expense Variance % Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance-Sept YTD YTD Variance Actual ($ M) ($ M) % Not applicable. Nuclear Fuel Experise Fuel - 1995 repoM on an in&s@ asis b rnW. 50.6 ($ M) 4.1 ($ M) - 7.5% Fuel 1994 55.9 ($ M) 1.6 ($ M) 2.9% 1995 Year End Budaet 75.1 ($ M) Performance Summary: The St. Lucie variance as of the end of September was due to kwer generation ( 12.0%) and a higher amortization rate (+5.1%). The lower Y T D generation is net of- (a) a decrease in generation for Unit 1 due to the March outage for Pressurizer Valve repair, the reactor trip in July during Turbine Control testing, and various operational problems in August and September; and (b) an increase in generation for Unit 2 due to higher plant capacity than planned. The increase in amortization rate is due to a design change for Unit 2, which requires the early discharge of eight assemblies currently in core. Contact Lorraine Tymms. 694 3450 I indicator Type NRC INPO X Corp X Div B4
INVENTORY LEVELS TURKEY P0lNT 100 - IGoodI
- V 75 - --~~- ---
.s+
u) R 50-- ----------------- ---- g -
=========
o - 25-- -------~~-~~--------------~~--------------------------------------------
- p e-o : : : : : : : : =
Year-End Year 1995 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dee Legend / Period S Y T D CAPITAL 2.7 5.8 n/a 6.4 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.3 7.1 7.3 7.3 7.4 E YT D REGULAR 58.0 79.1 74.7 54.6 42.4 41.5 40.9 40.4 39.6 39.4 39.0 39.1 39.0 37.9 Definitions Caoital - Part or equipment which: meets the criteria established by the Property Retirement Unit Catalog for a Retirement Unit; is associated with a specific plant in service, the failure of which would seriously impair the utility's ability to provide continued operation; and, is not readilly available from suppliers, or typically requires a long lead time. Regular Materials needed to keep operational the physical equipment and facilities of the plant (e.g., spare parts, consumables, commodrties, tools). Statistical SummaryL IndustryPerformance S. tail End % change Totaf Cacital (Recular OnM Monthly 7.3 7.4 1.4% 7.4 7.2% IBG (Year 1994) YTD 6.9 Average $ 43.6 B12ulE Top Quanile Entry $ 34.7 Monthly 39.0 37.9 - 2.8% Top Quartile Average $ 28.9 Y T-D 42.4 37.9 - 10.6% 1995 Target Regular $39M Performance Summary: Turkey Point's Capital inventory increased slightly in September due to the addition of a steam generator feed pump motor to inventory. Regular inventory at Turkey Point decreased significanty in September, mainly as a result of issuance of Unit 3 Outage material. Data Sourm: Dick Rose 2464692 Nuclear Materials Management Manager indicator Type NRC INPO Corp X Div B5
INVENTORY LEVELS l-ST LUCIE 100 _- (GoodI
~~ 75 - -----------------------
------------------------------------------- V ----
1 E : l
- 32. -
- en cc 5n _- .. .............. ...
.............,..=..=..;...................
5 -
=== - - - - m 1
g : a - 25 - ------------------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
, _ _ ,e
~ Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec ds Y.T.D CAPITAL 1.8 7.2 7.0 7.1 11.2 11.2 11.2 21.5 24.3 24.3 24.3 24.2 24.3 24.2 5 Y.T D REGULAR 49.4 58.7 65.2 60.2 43.7 44.2 44.6 44.9 46.6 46.3 46.1 46.0 45.9 44.6 Definitions Cantal Part or equipment which: meets the enteria established by the Property Retrernent Unit Catalog for a Retirement Unit;is associated with a specific plant in service, the failure of which would seriously impair the utikty's ability to provide continued operation; and, is not readilly available from suppliers, or typically requires a long lead time. i l
l Regular - Matenals needed to keep operational the physical equipment and facilities of the plant (e.g., spare parts, - ' consumables, commodities, tools). Statistical Summary industryPerformance L Catital Total l Monthly 24.3 24.2 0.2% (Reaular onM Y-T-D 11.2 24.2 116.1% l IBG (Year 1994) Regular Average $ 43.6 Monthly 45.9 44.6 2.8% Top Quartile Entry $ 34.7 YTD 43.7 44.6 2.1% Top Quartile Average $ 28.9 l 1995 Target: Regular $40M Performance Summary St. Lucie Nuclear Materials Management expects Regular inventory levels to continue to decline through 1995, with outage issues and unused DME write-offs still to be dispositioned. Data Source: Tom Krescurg 465-4183 Nudear Matenals Management Manaoer Indicator Type D nac supo corp x Div B-6
COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE Month
- o y.T.D TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 M YE 1400 ,,
A Y ETarget A 1000k ---------------------------------------lGoodl-
- v 800 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B 600
- ~~~~~~~-------- - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - -
425 2 - A 375 y 400-- - ------ 2 -- h995 VfE Taroet 7751
. A
-~~~~~--~~~~~~-----~~~~~~~~--~~
200 -- - - - - ----~~~~~---- 0 - Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
^
Month i+ 3.0 22 9.8 2.2 3.1 2.9 1.3 4.6 168 Year To-Date 731 l 938 l 326 l 276 l 469 3.0 5.3 15.0 17.3 20.4 23.3 24.6 292 198 Definitions Collective Radiation Exposure is the total extemal whole-body radiation dose received by all on-site personnel (including contractors and visitors) during the time period as measured by thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's). It is reported in man-rems for the station. Current month readings are taken from direct reading dosimeters (DRD's). The 3 Year Running Average values are adjusted as TLD results become available. Statistical Summary Industry Performance M YTD 3 Yr Runnina Man-Rem Man Rem 1995 168.4 197.6 391.3 INPO (PWR's) (2 Und Site) Man-Rem - 1994 4.4 224.2 303.9 Median 3-yr Distribution (7/92 - 6/95) 314 Targets: 1995 Y-T-D (TLD 113.0 1995 Goal 370 095 Year End(TLD) 275.0 1994 Year End (TLD) 475.0 Performance Summary l l Turkey Point Man-Rem was 168.4 in September and 197.6 Y T-D which was above the Y-T-D target of 113.0. l Turkey Points 3-Yr Running Average of 391.3 exceeds Industry Median of 314.0. The increase for the month was a result of the Unit 3 refueling outage moved ahead of schedule. Data Source: Nuclear Dmson Health Physics
Contact:
Joe Danek, Manaaer. 694 4213 Indicator Type NRc INpo co , @ Div C-1 l
l
. 1 COLLECTIVE RADIATION EXPOSURE 1 E Month
-o- y T.D ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2
@ YE 1000 A Y E Target -
IG00dI 800-- ----------------------- ------------------------------------------V ---' l m 300 A
- 2 600 - ---------- * ----- -----------------------------------------------
4001 _ 119M V/E Target 2401 A
)
200 -
'---------------------------------------------- \
0 ~ Year-End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep oct Nov Dec Month ' 4 5.1 19.1 19.7 3.9 4.1 3.5 4.0 282 20.7 Year To Date 731 l 451 l 245 l 460 l 505 5.1 24.2 43.9 47.9 52.0 55.5 59.4 87.6 108
. Definitions Collective Radiation Exposure is the total extemal whole-body radiation dose received by all on-site personnel (including contractors and visitors) during the time period as measured by thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's).
It is reported in man-rems for the station. Current month readings are taken from direct reading dosimeters (DRD's). The 3 Year Running Average values are adjusted as TLD results become available. 1 Statistical Summary. _ IndustryPerformance Sepi YTD 3 Yr Runnina Man-Rem Man-Rem - 1995 20.7 108.4 362.6 INPO (PWR'SI (2 Unit Site) Man-Rem - 1994 3.4 185.0 433.5 Median 3-yrDistnbution(7/92 6/95) 314 Targets: 1995 Y T-D (TLD) 122.0 1995 Goat 370 1995 Year-end (TLD) 240.0 1994 Year-end (TLD) 650.0
- Performance Summary St Lucie Man-Rem was 20.7 for the month and 108.4 Y T D which was below the Y T-D target of 122.0. St Lucie's 3-Yr Running Average of 362.6 was higher than the industry Median of 314.0.
Data Source: Nuclear Division Health Physics
Contact:
Joe Danek, Manaaer. 694-4213 i Indicator Type nRc x Inpo corp x Div C-2
- l. SECONDARY CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE l PTN 3 Month l
% PTN 4 Month TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4
. E2]PTN 3 Y E - l liliiillPTN 4 Y-E 0.5 2.00 i A Y E Targets G olod [~ i
~
V w 0.4- --------------------
,!:j 1.50 ------------------------------------------------
;j l
8 0.3- --------------------
- - - - - - - - - T"E'S
$ A 25 g -
1.00 - --- E 0.2- ---- f--g- ' m /: l
$l 7 l 0.50 - -.. .. ............
o 0.1 -s i -
-/ .j i
0 0 Year End Year 1995 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Legend / Period 1990 1991 19921993 1994
.14 .12 .14 n/a 1.00 1.00 1.01 1.00 1.02 1.00 1.01 0 PTN 3 .198 .17 PTN 4 .178 .24 .15 .18 .15 n/a 1.02 1.08 1.05 1.03 1.04 1.00 1.04 1.02 l
Definition through 1994 - Definition Begiftning 1995 Secondary Chemistry Performance index (CPI) is Secondary Chemistry indicator (Cl) is calculated as follows: calculated as follows: SGC1/LVx + SGSO/LVx + SGNa!LVx + FWFe/LVx + FWCu/LVx + OyLVx gg 6 l 08 20 10 SGCI LVx = 1.60 ppb SGCI = Steam Generator blewdown chloride SGSO LVx = 1.70 ppb KA = Monthly Average Steam Generator SGSO4= Steam Generator blowdown sulfate 4 blowdown cation conductivity in mhos/cm SGN3 = Steam Generator blowdown sodium SGNa LVx = 0.80 ppb FWFe LVx = 5.00 ppb NA = Monthly Average Steam Generator FWFe =Finalfeedwateriron FWCu =Finalfeedwatercopper FWCu LVx = 020 ppb blowdown sodiumin ppb
= Condensate dissolved oxygen Cond.DO = 3.30 ppb 0 2= Monthly Average <:ondensate dissolved 02 oxygenin ppb LVx = Limitng value for that parameter Statistical Summary Industry Performance l Sg Y T-D Ava.
}HEQ.(PWR's with Recirculating Steam Q 1.01 l Unit 3 Outage Generators Not on Molar Ratto Control)
Urut 4 1.02 1.04 July 1994 June 1995 U. S. Median 1.19 1995 Lowest Chemistry index Value Attainable 1.00 Turkey Pent Units 3 & 4 1995 Year-End Taroets 51.18 Performance Summary 1 I Turkey Point Unit 3 was in a refueling outage beginning September 4th, and no Chemistry Performance was reported for the (nonth. Unit 4's Chemistry Performance of 1.02 was below the Year End target and Industry Median in September. Data Source: Plant Chemistry [ Contact- J Seacer 694 4176 NRC lNPo Corp oiv Indicator Type C-3
SECONDARY CHEMISTRY PERFORMANCE M PSL 1 Month EZ2 PSL 2 Month CEZ3PSL1 Y E ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 Ei!!SPSL 2 Y E 0.5 2.00 A Y E Targets
. lGood) '
w 0 .4 - ----- - -------- g k j , 1.50 ------------------------------------------------ 0.3- - E - a: - E - E - A ' 1,00 - .. ............
,l
!E 0.2-- -
7 . sa /\ m . / y 0F 0.50 - -- ------------
/ - '
O
^ 0 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec l PSL 1 .27 .34 .25 .22 .24 1.43 1.13 1.26 1.18 1.13 1.14 1.19 1.25 0 PSL2 .32 .40 .43 .30 .37 1.09 1.14 1.10 1.12 1.06 1.12 1.15 1.29 1.27 l Definition through 1994 . Definition Beginning1995 Secondary Chemistry Performance index (CPI) is Secondary Chemistry Indicator (Cl) is calculated as follows:
calculated as follows-gg SGCl/LVx + SGSO4 /LVx + SGNa/LVx + FWFe/LVx + FWCu/LVx + O/LVx 08 20 10 6 3 SGCI = Steam Generator blowdown chloride SGCI LVx = 1.60 ppb KA = Monthly Average SteamGenerator SGSO4= Steam Generator blowdown sulfate SGSO4 LVx = 1.70 ppb blowdown cation conductivity in ymbos/cm SGNa = Steam Generator blowdown sodium SGNa LVx = 0.80 ppb NA = Monthly Average Steam Generator FWFe = Finalfeedwateriron FWFe LVx = 5.00 ppb blowdown sodium in ppb FWCu = Finalfeedwater copper FWCu LVx = 0.20 ppb l 0 2= Monthly Average condensate dissolved 02 = Condensate dissolved oxygen Cond.DO = 3.30 ppb j oxygen in ppb LVx = Limiting value for that pararnater Statistical Summary Industry Performance. Se.2!
. Y-T-D Avo. jt[pQ_(PWR's with Recirculating Steam C1
. Generators Not on Molar Ratio Control) l Unit 2 1.27 1.15 July 1994 June 1995 U. S. Median 1.19 1995 Lowest Chemistry Index Value Attainable 1.00 1995 Year End Targets: s1.25 Performance Summary St. Lucie Unit 1 was out of service in September.
I Unit 2 Chemistry Performance for the month exceeded the Year End target as a result of elevated condensate dissolved oxygen. For the year, performance exceeded the Year End target and industry Median. Data Source: Plant Chemistry Contact J. Seager 6944176 indicator Type NRC X INPO Corp Div C4
l l SOLID WASTE DISPOSED l Month
- O - Y T-D TURKEY POINT UNIT 3 & 4 .
I E Y-E IGood f l AY-E Running - Target - p 1500 - ------------------------ 1 W if : l 1 o 1000 -- - - -- - " ' * - - - - - m
----------- 1 55 5
"' Y/E 1995 36 Mo. j
- 817 Runrung Target
------------------------------------ so cume n 500 - ~ -
A- g- ,
.a s 0
~
E "- -- l Year End Year 1995 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec l Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun t :v. - 105 380 488 99.1 3.5 131 0 18.7 13.8 Month . . 364 367 360 356 293 263 241 236 l 36 Mo. Running Avg 673 l 738 l 602 l 478 l 373 366 i Definitions
' I Solid Waste Disposed is the volume of low level solid radioactive waste shipped, in final form ready for burial during a given period. l l
l I
' The value is based,in part, on initial vendor and plant reports and may be updated when reports are documented.
Statistical Summary ~ Industry Performance
$221 36 Mol Runnea Monthly Cubic Feet Industry (PWR's) (2 Unit Site)
Solid Waste Disposed -1995 13.8 235.5 SolidWaste Disposed 1994 29.2 371.9 364.9 Median 3-yrDistnbution(7/92 6/95) 1994 Median 270.7 Taraet 1995 Goal 647.4 Year End 1995 36 Mo. Running Avg: 390 cu.ft. Petformance Summary Turkey Point Solid Waste Disposed in September was 13.8. The 36-Month Running average of 235.5 cubic feet was below the 1995 Year-End target and 3-yr. Industry Median. Data Source: Nuclear Division Health Physics Contact A. J. Gould. 694-4199 nRc x inpo Corp Div IndicatorType C-5
SOLID WASTE DISPOSED Month
-O- Y T D ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2
@ YE 2000 AY-E Running -
Target -
- [Goodl l 1500 - -----------------------
--------------------------------------V --------
Ui te : L). 1000 - ------------------- co - { h
- 610 574 YE 1995 36 Mo.
Running Target A A $10 CutneFt 500-- - " --- "----- ---------------- ------------------------- A
~
0 - - - l
- Year End Year 1995
- Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month - '
480 468 37.5 268 528 323 l 0 106 287 36 Mo. Running Avg 991 l 713 l 611 l 475 l 444 413 418 398 384 387 389 378 367 342 l Definitions 1 i 1 SoUd Waste Disposed is the volume of low-level solid radioactive waste shipped, in final form ready for burial during a given penod. l l l
- The value is based, in part, on initial vendor and plant reports and may be updated when reports are documented.
I i Statistical Summary : IndustryPerformance. l r Ef2t, 36 Mo. Runnino MonthlyCubic Feet Solid Waste Disposed 1995 286.8 341.7 industry (PWR's) NN Solid Waste Disposed 1994 120.7 462.0 Median 3-yr Distnbution (7/92 6/95) 364.9 1994 Median 270.7 taw. 1995 N al 647.4 Year-End 1995 36 Mo. Running Avg: 510 cu. ft. Performance Summary l St. Lucie Solid Waste Disposed in September was 286.8. The 36-Month Running average of 341.7 cubic feet was below the 1995 Year-End target and the 3-yr. Industry Median. Data Source: Nuclear Division Health Physics
Contact:
A.J.Gould.6944199 l Indicator Type nRc lupo corp D Div l C-6
_ =_ -- 9 NRC VIOLATIONS Month o v.T.o TURKEY POINT 3 & 4 22 Y E 20 ) A Y-ETarget lGoodl ft #7
- AA V
----------------------------------------------- }
,, 15 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
z - i A 12 o -
- A o 10 ---
t2 5 g
- A l1995 Y E Target 5 7l l A l o -
$5 L " - ----------' ---------------------------------------------- l Year-End Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994
' 0 0 0 l 0 0 C' '. s , 0 0 0 0 Month '
0 0 0 0 0 YTD 13 l 13 l 8 l 4 l4 0 0 0 0 Definitions. I Violabons are categonzed in terms of five levels of seventy to show their relative importance. Seventy Levels I and il are ! violations that involve actual or high potential impact on the public. Seventy Level 111 violations are cause for significant concem. Severity Level IV violations are less serious, but are of more than minor concem; i.e., if left uncorrected, could lead to a more senous concem. Severity Level V violations are of minor safety or environmental concem Vdations are counted on the date of the inspection est rneeting. l Violations are now counted with respect to the date of occurrence (using the date of the inspecton exit meeting)instead of the date of the inspecton report, as was done in the past I Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance \ NRC Viofations 0 1994 IBG Group Mean 16.2 NOVs 1995 0 0 2 1994 Region 11 Mean 13.1 l i NOVs .1994 9.0 1994 IBG Top Quartile Mean l 1994 Region 11 Top Quartile Entry 8.0 Tarcets Source: Nuclear Data Services Database 10/95 f , Performance Summary - Turkey Point had no NRC Violations in September. l , 1 i Data Source: PTN Nuclear Ucensing l Contact E Weinkam 246-7383 5 I Indicator Type Nac 0 nNeo D corp Div D-1
)
NRC VIOLATIONS Month
""O- Y T D ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 @ YE 20 A Y-ETarget -
IGoodl V en 15 - z - O -
\
9 su sr '
< A g 10__- _ _A. . . . . . . . . to ..to ...... ............................... . . . . . . . . . . . . .
o -
'y h995 Y E Target: s7l A
g 5 _-. .. . . . 0- M Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month / u . 7- 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 l YT-D 9 l8l8l7 l9 0 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 10 I Definitions' \ Violations are categon2ed in terms of five levels of severity to show their relative importance. Seventy Levels I and ll are violations that involve actual or high potentialimpact on the public. Seventy Level til violations are cause for significant concem. { Seventy Level IV violatons are less senous, but are of more than minor concem; i.e., if left uncorrected, could lead to a more serious concem. Severity Level V violations are of minor safety or environmental concem. Violations are counted on the date of the inspection exit meeting. Violations are now counted with respect to the date of occurrence (using the date of the inspecton exit meeting) instead of the date of the inspection report, as Was done in the past. Statistical Summary. IndustryPerformance
},gd ,HQ NRC Violations 1994 IBG Group Mean 16.2 NOVs 1995 7 10 1994 Region 11 Mean 13.1 NOV's - 1994 0 6 1994 IBG Top Quartile Mean 9.0 1994 Region 11 Top Quartile Entry 8.0 Year End 1995 57 Year End 1994 s 7 Source: Nuclear Data Services Database 10/95 Performance Summary St Luce reported seven NRC Volatons m September. The tonowmg NRC Mritatens have been recorred Y T@:
M54141 Failure to Sample Safety kliecton Tank e Accordance W)th Tech Speafestion Survedlance. Est utg 2/495.
#95{1{2 Fa. lure 10 Follow Procedure m implemenong Indepene Venreation Associated Wdh the Letdown Letter of Instruenon. Emt Mig:2/4%
#95{5-01 Fadure to Meet Desp Control Measures on Overload Hea. , installed in a Battery Charger. Ext Mtg 4W95
#9515-0 Fadute to Fdiow Procedures and Block MSIS Aduaton Est te W15,%
#951542 Two Examples of Fadure to Fdlow Proca@res Dunng RCP Restring Emt Mtg W1595.
#95-1543 Fadure to Fdlow Procedure and Document ADnormal Valve Aigrutin Valve Deviaton Log Emt Mtg 9/15/95.
#951504 Failure to Foeow Procedures Dunng Abgreent of Shutdown Codng Systent Est Mtg 9n595.
r% 1545 Fadure to Fdlow Procedure and Document a Deroency on a Contamment Spray Valve Test Procedure. Est M's W11%
#95-t5-06 Fadure toinitialMansnance Steps as Wort was Convilete<L Emt Mtg W15/95.
#9515-c7 FaAure to Fonow Procedures Resulting m Spray Down on Contanment. Emi Mtg. F15%
Three potental NRC %dabons are penckng further NRC review'
#95-1641 Post Mantanance Tesang inadequate on PoRVs (Not LAW 10CFRSC App. B. Cntena). Est M:g W30,95.
#951M2 In Sennce Surveaance Testing inadequate on PoRVs (Not lA 10CFR50 App. B. Cntena). Exit Mtg r3@95.
#95-1M3 LTOP Operatiairy Tech Spec was votated tiy not Hawng the PORVs Operaole When Required Dunng Two Prewous Outages. Est Mtg. IV3@95 Data Source: PSL Nuclear Licensing Contat R E Dawson. 465-4107 Indicator Type nRc lupo corp Div D2
~
LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS BY CAUSE CODES i l TURKEY POINT UNIT 3 ADMINISTRATIVE LICENSED OPERATOR OMER PERSMNEL 10 10 10 1
- e. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . g. ................................
8-
~~~~~~-~~~~~-~~
l 6- ~ ~ - - - - - - - ~ ~ - ~ 6~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 6- ~~ ~~~ ~~~-~~~ ~~
............................... 4 ................................ 4 ................................
4 f 2 - - - - - - 2- 2
~
I 0 ........./.... . 0 . . .A. . . . . . .A. . . . 0 .............. i n a rv i n m rv i n m rv i n m rv i n m iv i n a rv i n m ay i n m rv i n m w r n m iv i n m w n m rv 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 MAINTENANCE DESIGN MISCELLANEOUS 10 10 10 l 8: ............................... 8: ................................ ,} ...............................
..... ......................... ................................ 4 ................................
4 4 2- - - - - - - - 2- -- - - -- - --- 2-
~
~ '
0 ......../..... . 0 .......A....... 0 . . . . . A. . . . . . . . . i n m rv i n m rv i n m rv i n m rv i n m iv i n m rv i n m rv i a m rv i n m v i a m iv i n m rv i n m rv 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 l l Definitions Licensee Event Reports (LER) are submitted to the NRC by licensees to report the unusual occurrences prescribed by 10CFR50.73. Cause Codes are intended to identify possible programmatic deficiencies. The cause code trend data are developed using the NRC's Sequence Coding Search System (SCE w. 0ase. This database is developed from au LER's and lags other performance data by as much as two quarters. Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance NB.G Industry Average Cause Codes Ott 95-1 Runnino 4 Otrs Ot' 951 Runnino 4 Otrs
=
Cause Codes Administrative 1 3 Administrative 07 5.5 Ucensed Operator 0 1 Ucensed Operator 02 1.0 Other Personnel 0 0 Other Personnel 02 2.0 l Maintenance 0 3 Maintenance 0.9 7.4 0 3 Design 0.5 3.1 Design 0 0 Miscellaneous 0.1 0.4 Miscellaneous 10 Total 2.5 19.4 Total 1 l Performance: Summary i l Unit 3 performance for the 19951st Quarter was below the 1st Quarter industry average for all cause codes except Administrative. Unit 3 performance for the last 4 Quarters was below the 4 Quarter Industry Average for a!! cause codes. Unit 3 reported one LER in September, LER #95-005-00 enttled ' Containment Pressure Testing Procedure Resull: in inhibiting Both Trains of Containment Pressure Irutaated Engineered Safety Features dated September 13,1995. The event occurred on August 18.1995. l 4 Data Source NRC (AEOD) Quarterly Performance Indicators Report Indicator Type NRC nNeo Corp Q Div D-3
. = -- _ . _ . .-. . . _ . - .-
l l [ t LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS BY CAUSE CODES
, 1 i
TURKEY POINT UNIT 4 ; 10 ADMINISTRATIVE LICENSED OPERATOR 10 10 OTHER PERSONNEL I i . \ 8 ................................ g--.............................. i
- g. ................................
6- ~ ~ ....~ -...........- - ~- s.-..~..~ ~.~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~
- s. - ~... ........~..~.~ ~.... i 4 .. ..~.......................
4{ ................................ 4 .' ................................ 2- -- . . ..- .. - - -- 2- - -- - -- - - - 2- - - - -- j
.....A.....A 0 T, ,/, . . .\. , , A, , , , .
0 .. ,.,,... ,, . 0 .... ! i n m rv i n m w 2 n m n i n m w a m w n mrvi a m w I a m n , 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 r n m w n m rv i n m rv r a m w ' 1992 1993 1994 1995
- 10 10 DESEN S OUS 10 l
. \
8- ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- l 8- ~ ~ ~ - - - ~ - ~ " ~ - - ~ ~ ~ - e."................................ e ................................
.' e. ...............................
. )
, 4_ .. ........................... 4 ................................ )
; . 4 ................................
s . ... ........ .. . ....... 2 2 ................ ..... ....... 2 ............................... l ' 0 ,
.... ........ 0 ....A...,,, ,,. 0 .....,,......,
1 i n mwi n mwi n mw i n mw i n mwi n mwi n mw i n mw i 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 i n mwi n mwin mw r n mw i 1992 1993 1994 1995 t Definitions ' I i Licensee Event Reports (LER) are submitted to the NRC by licensees to report the unusual occurrences prescribed by 10CFR50.73. Cause Codes are intended to identify possible programmatic deficiencies. The cause code trend data are developed using the NRC's Sequence Coding Search System (SCSS) database. This database is j developed from all LER's and lags other performance data by as much as two quarters, l StatisticaliSummary? IndustryPerformance Cause Codes Otr 95-1 Runnino 4 Otrs Y^ Otr 9 un 4 Otrs Administrative 1 3 Administrative 0.7 5.5 Licensed Operator 0 1 Licensed Operator 0.2 1.0 Other Personnel 0 2 Other Personnel 0.2 2.0
' Maintenance 0 5 Maintenance 0.9 7.4 Design 0 2 Design 0.5 3.1 Miscellaneous ,0,. .,9 MJscellaneous ,2,1 ,0.4 i
Total 1 13 Total 25 19 4 Performance Summary: Unit 4 performance for the 1st Quarter of 1995 was below the 1st Quarter industry average for all cause codes except Adrrunistrative. For the past 4 Ouarters, Unit 4 performance was below the 4 Quarter Industry Average for all cause codes. Unit 4 reported no LER's in September. Data Source: NRC (AEOD) Quarterly Performance Indicators Report Indicator Type G)unc unp0 corp D Div D-4 l l
l LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS BY CAUSE CODES l l ST. LUCIE UNIT 1 l l l ADMINISTRATIVE LICENSED OPERATOR OTHER PERSONNEL l 10 10 10 l a: ............................... a: ................................ 8: ................................ 6- " " " " " " " " " - " - - " " ' 6- " - " " - ~ ~ " - " " " " " " " 6- " " " " " " " " " " " " " - - - 4 ................................ 4 ................................. 4 ............................... 2- - --- - --- --- ---- - 2- - - - - - -- -- -- 2- -- - - - - - -- -- - 0 m. . . . . . ./. v. . .-. . . I n m rv i n m rv i n m w I n m rv 0 N. . . . . A. . . . . . . . . 0 7. .A. . . .A. . . . . . . i n m w i n m w I n m rv i n m w i n m rv i n m rv i n m rv i n m v 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 10 MA N ANCE 10 08 " MISCELLANEOUS 10 8 ............................... g. ................................ g. ................................
~ ~ '
e} 8 8 ............................... 4 4 4 ............................... 2- -- - -
- . - - - - 2- -- --- -
2- - -- - - -- -
~ ~
0 .............. lamWinmWinmWtomW 0 T. . . . A. . . . . . . . . . l a m W i n m W l a m W 10 m N 0 .A.......A...... i n mW1 n mWi n mW l a mN
\
1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1
' Definitions Ucensee Event Reports (LER) are submitted to the NRC by Ecensees to report the unusual occurrences prescribed I by 10CFR50.73. Cause Codes are intended to identify possible programmatic deficiencies. The cause code trend data are developed using the NRC's Sequence Coding Search System (SCSS) database. This database is i developed from all LER's and lags other performance data by as much as two quarters.
l l Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance Cause Codes Otr 95-1 Runnino 4 Otrs E industry Average Cause Codes Ott 95-1 Runnino 4 Otrs Administratve 1 3 Administrative 0.7 5.5 Licensed Operator 0 0 Licensed Operator 0.2 1.0 Other Personnel 0 1 Other Personnel 0.2 2.0 Maintenance 1 5 Maintenance 0.9 7.4 Design 0 2 Design 0.5 3.1 Miscellaneous 0 1 Miscellaneous 0.1 04 l l Total 2 12 Total 2.5 19.4 Performance Summary Unit 1 perfomance for the 1st Quarter of 1995 was below the 1st Otr industry average for all cause codes except Administratve and Maritenance. For the past 4 Quarters. Unit 1 performance was below the 4 Quarter industry Average for all cause codes except Miscellaneous. l Urut i reported one LER in September: LER #95-008 entited 'High Pressure Safety injecton Pump Operaton Dunng Plant Conditions Not Alloweo by Technical Specihcations Due to Personnel Error' dated September 27,1995. The event occuned August 28.1995. 1 I Data Source: NRC (AEOD) Quanerly Performance Indicators Report l Indicator Type nRc snPo Corp Div D5
. _ _ ~_ . _ _ _ . _- . . - - . - - . - _ _ - .- - - . _ - - - .
r LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS BY CAUSE CODES ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 1 i ADMINISTRATIVE LICENSED OPERATOR lr 10 10 10 OTHER PERSONNEL l i l
- e. ...............................
- e. ................................ ,. ................................
4 ............................... 4 ............................... 4 ................................ l . 2 2 ........ ....................... 2 ................................ 0 ,,...,...,,... O i...... .,.... 0 ..... .. ,,,.... Iamwrnmwinmwinmw n m w n a rv i n m w I n m tv i n mwI n mwi n mw I n m v 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 , MAINTENANCE DESIGN I 10 10 MISCELLANEOUS 10 8: ............................... 8 ................................ e! ............................... I . 1 6- ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ " - - - - " " - " 6-- - - ' - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 6- - - ~ ~ " - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - 4 ................................ 4 .................. ............ I 4 ...............................
~
- g. .. . . .. ....... ....... g................................. g.
~
~
i 0- ............. I E m IV I n m IV I n m 1v i n m IV 0 M. . . . . . . O. . . . . . . 0 ,,... ......... ! i 1992 I E m !v I E m IV 1 D m IV I n m IV I n m IV 1 D m N ! n m IV ! O m rv 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 1992 1993 1994 1995 l 1
. Definitions ~ . ! Ucensee Event Reports (LER) are submitted to the NRC by licensees to report the unusual occurrences prescribed l by 10CFR50.73. Cause Codes are intended to identify possible programmatic deficiencies. Tl e catse code trend l data are developed using the NRC's Sequence Coding Search System (SCSS) datst.ase. Tt9 database is ;
developed from all LER's and lags other performance data by as much as two quarters.
- 1
~
- Statistical Summary e . IndustryPerformance-Quse Codes Ott951 Runnino 4 Otrs E Nuq Average Cause Codes Otr 951 Runnino 4 Otrs Administratve 0 4 Administrative 0.7 5.5 l Ucensed Operator 0 0 l
Licensed Operator 0.2 1.0 Other Personnel 0 1 Other Personnel 0.2 2.0 Maintenance 0 5 j Maintenance 0.9 7.4 Design 0 1 Design 0.5 3.1 Miscellaneous 0 0 Miscellane.ous 0.1 04 Total 0 11 Total 2.5 19 4
. Performance Summary Unit 2 perferrnance for the 1st Quarter of 1995 and Running 4 Quarters was beter the industry Average for all cause codes.
t Unit 2 reported no LER's in September. Data Source: NRC (AEOD) Quarterly Performance indicators Report Indicator Type X NRC INPO Corp Div D-6
4 i SALP CATEGORY RATINGS Pm A PTN Target NUCLEAR DMS10N j @ PSL 3 ,,,, { A PSLTarget - l Good l M "~
- 0 V 2_
z P _ si: E A l 3 j .2 . ... .
..A.
j 0- 1 I i I I i I i Lec end / Period 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 i SALP Rating 2.27 2.18 2.25 2.14 1.86 1.38 - 1.29 1.00 Period Ending 4/30/86 5/31/87 6/30/88 7/31/89 7/31/90 9,2 M1 - 1!30/93 &27/94 SALP Rating 1.55 1.20 - 1.29 1.14 - 1.00 - 1.00 l Period Ending 4/30/86 10/31/87 - 4/30'89 10/31/90 - 5/2/92 - 1/1/94 l SALPProgram Description it is the policy of the NRC to use me Systematic Asassement of Ucensee Performance (SALP) process to art culate the agency's observabons and insights on Econses safety performance. The SALP report communicates those observatons and insightL ] l Evaluahon Freeuency The NRC will normally review and evoluele each power mactor Ikonese that Paaaaaaaa en operating license at least every 18 months. 1 When me NRC estermines that me perfonnance warrants a more frequent evaluebori, the artmal SALP frequency may be increased. The asserstnant period mey be estended to a maximum of 24 months when a plant receives a Category 1 ratng in all four functonal areas. Funcaenal Areas Performance is genera #y evaluated in four(4)functonal areas: 1
- 1. Plant Onershant. This functoEJ Erte consists chiefly of me control and eIsculon of activites difectly related b operating a plant E includes 8Ctivtbes l such as plant startup, power opersbon, plant shutdown, and system lineups. R also includes inimal and requalification traineg of licensed operators.
- 2. Mantenance This functonal area includes all actvtpos a--*=d wie eleier diagnoshc, predictive, prevents, or correctve memtenance of plant j' structures, systerns, and components, or mairmenance of the phyncal condihon of the plant
- 3. Engmaartng. This functhnal ares addresses me adequacy of technical and engineerMg support for et plant acdvidet R includes all licensee activttes
- sesociated with demgn control; the deniin, i instenaton, and toebng of plant modifications, engmeering and technical support for opersbons, outages, rnamtenance, tes6ng, surveinance, and procurement schwitles
- configuramon meegement; tiessprHissis infoneston and its retrievel; and support for
- . licensing scevities.
j 4. Plant Sunocrt This functonal eres covers all activities related to plant support functions, including radiological controis,(mergency preparedness, secunty, enemstry, and fire protecton. & - ; controis are aise lncsuded in mis area. Performance Category Rahngs Utentee perfonnerice in each hmcGonal ses la aseeened by assignk glegory rathg as discussed below: Category 1. Ucensee attenton and involvement have been property focused en safety and resulted in s arierlevel of setety performance. Category 2. ucensee anenton and invatvanent are normany men focused me resumed in a good invie or selety performenee.
! Category 1 Ucensee ottention and involvement have reautled in an acceptable level of portoneance However, perionnance may exhibit one or more of the fonowing cherectenancs; ineNective programs and signiScent issues, lack of conectve acton "_, ... , and deficiencess in root ceues analysis. Because the margin to unacceptable perfonnance in imponent aspecte is emell,increened NRC and Econese attenton is required.
{ f A more complete discussion of aamanament Frequency, Functonal Areas, and Performance Category Ratings is contained in NRC Management Directive L6. j 'Systemebe Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP)*,tormerty Appendur 0616. l Performance ' Summary ) St Lucie SALP pened began on January 1,1994 and ends January 6,1996. Turtiev Pcirt St. Luce Functonal Area
- Rght Mont Recent fdst Most Recent Plant Operations 1 1 1 1 Mamtenance 2 angiroving 1 1 1 Engineenng 2 tveroving 1 1 1 Plant Support n/a 1 n/a 1 Ernergency Preparedness 1 n/a 1 n/a Radiological Controis 1 n/a 1 n/a Security I n/a 1 n/a seit Assesorenvouahty vertscaban 1_ _ng_ 1 n/a Qatall 1EJ 1.00 1.00 1.t,o
- on 7ntu runenwasi eien more reeucea is tour M Contacts E Weinkam (PTN1 246-7383 and R E. Dawson (PSLb 465-d107 Indicator Type NRc. inPo x corp x oi, D-7
i- ) INPO ASSESSMENT RATINGS f* E PTN i A PTN Target NUCLEAR DMSION ! 4 . j A PSLTarget ... . ... ... . . 1 l Good l l 4 V 3- - - - - v> 0 i 2 P j g 2- - - - - - - - A- A-O z_. j_ .. .
..A.
l 0- 1 I I I 'l i 1 1 I i Legend / Period 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 PTN 4 4 3 4 3 - 2 2 - 1 PSL - - 2 - 1 - - 1 - 1 4 f INPO AssessmentProgramDescription The Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) conducts periodic evaluations of site activties to make an overat determination of plant safety, to evaluate management systems and controls, and to identify areas needing improvement, hformation is assembled from } discussions, interviews, observations, and reviews of documentabon. 1
- Evaluation Freauenev
j INPO's goal is to vist each plant on an average of eury 18 months. However, this frequency may vary depending upon the previous assessment ratings. For instance, I a plant is rated a *1* or *2*, the interval between assessments is
- usually 20 24 months; !! a plant is rated a '4' or a '5*, the assosoment interval le 5 la months.
} Nh..es cateacrv Ratinas: J j ' Category 1: Overat periormance is excellent. hdustry standarde of excellence are met in most areas. No significant wealmesses noted. Category 2: Overs 5 performance is exemptery. hdustry standards of excellence are met h many areas. No significant wealmesses noted. Category 3: Overst performance is ponerally in leeping with the high standards required in nucteer power. However, improvements are needed in a number of areas. A few signifcant weaknesses may exist. Category 4: Overst performance is acceptable, but improvements are needed h a wide range of areas. Significant weaknesses are noted in severalareas. Catetory 5: Overau performance does not meet the industry standard of acceptable performance. The margin of nuclear safety is measurabty reduced. Strong and immediate management action to correct deficiencies is required. Special attention, assistance, and follow up are requ'red. NOTE: R a plant is found to be operating without en adequate mergin of nuclear safety, INPO will request that the plant be shutdown, or not started up.
?
Performance Summary Turkey Point and SL Lucie received an INPO category rating of '1* in 1995. Contacts: E. Weviam (PTN) - 246-7383 and R. E. Dawson (PSU . 4654107 Indicator Type Nstc iNeo corp x oiv D-8
l O l OPERATOR EXAMINATION PERFORMANCE 4 i TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 100-i :
~
_ . . ._ J.tSs ses eg Mual En_m ],ge@ f gg . .... . ....... g _ A w 60- - - ' - -
- - - --- --- - - - - lG x oh -
i U e m 40- '- - -- - - --- -- - - - - - - - - - - m - 20 - 4 1 1 - 1 ( 0 1 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Exams 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec initial Exams No Taken 3 39 5 0 8 13 l 1 RO/SRO No. Passed 3 39 5 0 8 13 l Ucense Pass Rate 100% 100 % 100 % 0% 100% 100 %
- Operator No.laken 49 47 78 69 63 58
! Requal No. Passed 45 44 75 66 60 56 ,
Exams Pass Rate 92% 94 % } 96 % 96 % 95 % 96 5 % 1 i Definitions
- Initial License Examination (RO/SRO) results are reported for all candidates taking an initial License Exam as conducted l by the NRC.
i Operator Requalification Examination results are reported for both RO's and SRO's. This examination is administered 4 annually by the utility and may be jointly administered by the NRC. Retests of operators who failed examinations are not j i included. \ Statistical Summary'. IndustryPerformance , Initial RO/SRO License Exams i YTD 1995 No Taken 13 No. Passed % Pass Rate 13 100% dN "**N ini$al NRC Enma NRC Reaual Enma
. .YT.D.1994. . . . . . . 8. . . . . . . 8. . . . . . 100%. . ....
Ooerator Recual Exams Ro's Pas % HM Ro's Pau Rate 91M instant SRo's Pass Rate M.4% sRo's Pass Rate 85M No Taken No Passed % Pass Rate Upgrade sRo's Pass Rate 94M Average overall 88A YTD 1995 58 56 96.5 % A**9' 0"'81 84 8 YTD 1994 63 60 95.0 %
^ Performance Summary.
No exams . vere given at Turkey Point in September. Data Source: Nuclear Training.
Contact:
K. E. Beatty. Manager,6944217 Indicator Type unc INPo corp Div E1
l l* 1 OPERATOR EXAMINATION PERFORMANCE ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 100 ~ l Jn5_t*d.1=uad a.esalL=tInsem_ _ _
,0 .... . .
ae
.- A
' "" "" " " " " "" " " " " "" " "" " - " "" j Gmd h 60 -- -
W
=c -
cs: m 40 - "" m Q. 20h 1 ! 0 Year End Year 1995 Legend / Exams 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec inital Exams y Taken n/a 15 8 10 11 RO/SRO No. Passed rva 15 8 10 11 License Pass Rate rVa 100 % 100 % 100 % 100% l Operator No Taken 65 65 69 68 75 Requal No Passed 61 61 60 68 68 Exams Pass Rate 93% 94% 87% 100% 91 % Definitions i Initial Ucense Examinadon (PO/SRO) results are reported for all candidates taking an Initial License Exam as conducted by the NRC. ; Operator Requalificaton Examination results are reported for both RO's and SRO's. This examination is administered annuah by the utihty and may be jointly adtrinistered by the NRC. Retests of operators who failed examinations are not ) included.
- Statistical Summary IndustryPerfonnance Initial RO/SRO Ucense Exams The NRC at their het Regional Training Managers Meetlag for Escal year No Taken No Passed % Pass Rate iseq provided the sonowing data
YTD 1995 0 0 0% YTD 1994 11 11 100% M NRC Exam NRC Reed Exam Ocemtor Recual Exams Ro's Pass Rate NA RO's Pass Rate 91M ' m ,n sao.s pass Rais N.4% sRO's Pass Rate EO% No Taken No Passed Upgrade SRo's Pass Rats N.7% Average overall EO% l
% Pass Rate _
YTD 1995 0 0 0% #" "" YTD 1994 75 68 91 % Performance Summary No exams were given at St. Lucie in September. Data Source: Nudear Trairiing i Contact K E. Beatty. Manaaer. 6944217 Indicator Type Q NRc sNPo corp Div E-2
l ', i INDUSTRIAL SAFETY STATISTICS TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 8 75 - m m 6 lGoodl lll w 5 -
- - * - - - y-1
! m f cc 83- < - - - ' i gg ~ c%-o-o o-o-o-o--o . . . . . . . . . . . j . .. ... .. . 1995 LTA faget 0.40 0
- " * ~
' ^ ^
Year-End Year 1995 i Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Lost Time Accidents 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m Restricted Duty Cases 5 3 8 4 4 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 OSHA Recordableinjuries 43 35 33 33' 278 4 0 3 2 1 1 1 2 2 i O INPO: LTA/ Restricted Duty Cases 12 Mo. Average .50 .40 .51 .51 .32 .43 .32 .32 .33
-O
- OSHA: Recordableinjudes Year to Date 2.48 2.14 2.39 2.42 2.09 2.09 2.08 2.21 2.28 Definitions' i
For FPL employees pennanently assigned to the site (OSHA Recordables by Payrolliocation only): Lost Time Accident involves at least one full work day away from work follow'ng the day or the injury. Resh ted Duty involves at least one day of restrcted or lirtuted work actrvities by an injured employee. OSHA Recordable iniy.ry requires medical treatment beyond first aid. E Lost Tirne Accident and Restncted Duty Case Rate = Lost Tirne Accidents and Restncted Duty r 200 000 Manhours procuctive Manhours Worked OSHA: Recordable injury Rate = OSHA Recordable Iniuries x 200,000 Manhours Productive Mannours Worked Statistical Summary IndustryPerformance-12 Mo - Endino (Sect) g A e l1 9 Indudes restricted duty cases: July 1994 June 1995 Median 0.51 Ta @ s: 1994 Average 0.64 Year-End 1995 0.40 1995 Goal 0.50 Year-End 1994 0.45
. Performance . Summary.
Turkey Point reported r t Time injunes or Restricted Duty Cases in September. Turkey Point's 12 Month Ending Lost Tirne Accident Rate of 0.33 was below the Year-End target and Industry Median.
# NOTE: OSHA Recordable injuries for 1993 and 1994 (14 and 15) were adjusted to (33 and 27) this month to reflect temporary 1
employees not counted as part of INPO numbers.
- lOIE OSHA Ratz The Turkey Point rate depicted excludes Juno Staff hours and incidents The Corporate Safety Department publishes rnonthly Nuclear Division ratei The rates for this reporting pened are:
Month (thru 9/95) 1.94 YTD (thru 9/95) 1.66 Source: Plant Safety Supervisor CorporateTarget 3.10 Contact- W. Korte. 694 4235 Indicator Type NnC @sNPo @ Corp x Div F1
e i . INDUSTRIAL SAFETY STATISTICS ST. LUCIE UNITS 1 & 2 8 7- - m 6 GooNd w - V W5 m - g 4 .... ... . . . . . . . . . . . m 8 o 3- - -- - --- - o 2{ - - - -- - --- -- -- --- - ---- -- - -- j ..
.g ..... g ....g ........................ ....
1995 LTA Tarpt 0 40 E g 3 -
. . _w a Year End Year 1995 Legend / Period 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec LostTime Accidents 2 2 4 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 52!i Restrica Duty cases 5 5 3 1 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 OSHA Recordable injuries 33 20 15 19 23 2 0 1 1 1 3 1 1 1
-@- ,NPO: LTA/ Restricted Duty Cases 12-Mo. Average .51 .61 .62 .62 .52 .31 .42 .42 .51
-O
- OSHA: Recordableinjuries Year-to-Date 2.95 2.43 2.39 2.36 2.21 2.31 1.88 2.28 2.33 Definitions For FPL employees permanently assigned to the site (OSHA Recordables by Payroll locahon only):
Lost Tire Accident involves at least one full work day away from work following the day or the injury. Restncted Duty involves at least one day of restncted or limited work actmties by an injured employee. OSHA Recordable Iniufv requires medical treatment beyond first aid. Lost Time Accident and Restricted Duty Case Rate = Lost Time Accidents and Restricted Duty x 200.000 Manhours Productive Manhours Worxed QS_HA: Recordable injury Rate = OSHA Recordable Iniunes x 200,000 Manhours Productive Mannours Worxed Statistical Summary : IndustryPerformance 12 Mo - Endino (Sect) g LTA Rate 1995 0.51 includes restncted duty cases: LTA Rate 1994 0.50 July 1994 June 1995 Median 0.51 M*1 1994 Average 0 64 i Year End 1995 0.40 1995 Goal 0 50 Year End 1994 0.45 Performance Summary i A Lost Time iniury occurred at St. Luce when an employee sprained his ankle. The amputation of an employee's index finger following a maintenance accident reculted in a Restnctd Duty Case. St Lucie's 12-Month Ending Lost Tirne Accident Rate of 0.51 exceeds the Year-End target and is equal to tne Industry Median. A Lost Time Inpry has been added to February 1995 as a result of a utility worker straining his back while moving equipment; the ] injury was not classified as a Lost Time injury until August. j
- NQIE: OSHA Rate: The SL Luce rate depicted excludes Juno Staff hours and incidents. The Corporete Safety Department publishes monthly Nuclear Division rates. The rates for this reporting penod are: 1 Month (thru 9/95) 1.94 YTD (thru PO5) 1.66 Source: Plant Safety Supervisor CorcorateTaroet 3.10 Contact W. Korte. 694 4235 Indicator Type NRC X INPO X Corp X Div F2
INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: l l R. J. Acosta JNA/JB R. J. Hovey PTN/ PLT
- T. V. Abbatiello PTN/ PLT D. E. Jemigan PTN/ PLT K. E. Beatty JNO/JB H. H. Johnson PTN/ PLT L W. Bladow PSL/ PLT V. A. Kaminskas PTN/ PLT i W. H. Bohlke JEUJB T. Kreinberg PSUPLT i G. J. Boissy JN0/JB R. F. Kundalkar JPN/PTN J. L Broadhead JEX/JB H. N. Paduano JPN/JB C. L Burton PSUPLT J. G. Pizzutelli JNE/JB
! R. L Castro JDC/JB T. F. Plunkett PTN/ PLT J. Clay PSUPLT T. E. Roberts JPN/JB K. R. Craig JPN/JB R. E. Rose PTN/ PLT J. L Danek JNS/JB D. A. Sager PSUPLT D. J. Denver PSUJB J. Scarola PSUPLT R. E. Dawson PSUPLT C. H. Shotwell JHR/JB M. S. Dryden JNUJB R. Sipos PSUPLT P. L Fincher PSUPLT D. L Smith
]
JPN/JB ' J. E. Geiger JNA/JB R. A. Symes JNA/JB l J. H. Goldberg JEX/JB C. Villard JPN/JB R. R. Golden CC/JB W. E. Walker PSUPLT 1 J. C. Hampp ETS/JB E. Weinkam PTN/ PLT l J. R. Hartzog PTN/ PLT D. H. West PSUPLT , R. G. Heisterman PTN/ PLT J. A. West PSUPLT j ! EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION: i i W. R. Corcoran I i 21 Broadleaf Circle l I Windsor, CT 06095 ) Leslie N. Hartz Manager, Quality Assurance VEPCO 5000 Dominion Blvd. Glen Allen,VA 23060 l T. P. Johnson l NRC Senior Resident inspector i PTN/ PLT l Kerry D. Landis, Region 11 Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmission 101 Marietta Street, St..te 2900 Atlanta,GA 30323 D. Prevatt NRC Senior Resident inspector PSUPLT i Z1
4
\ r 3
To: System Owners 10 CPR 50.85 Expert Panel members MAENTENANCE i From: Michael Snyder # 4 PROC 5 TAM l Date: 9 July,1996 I s e N uc/e,, } i Ortle B 4 s i Attached for your review is a copy of the second Maintenance Rule Quarterly Report for 1996. j The purpose of this report is to provide you with feedback on the health of St. Lucie systems, j structures and components so that increased resources may be focused as necessary to improve I l equipment performance. I l Please provide a critique on this report so that its content and format can be optimized. i 1 l Copies to: l Art Stall l Bill Bohlke l Jim Scarola j Dan Denver ^ Chuck Wood Jeff West i Joe Marchese Randy Olson l Paul Fulford i Wes Bladow g Tony Menocal D l V 1 1
l l 3 1 l EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to provide feedback on the health of St. Lucie systems. structures and components (SSCs) so that increased resources may be focused as necessary to improve the performance of systems. Th- methodology for making this evaluation is outlined in the Nuclear Energy Institute's guideline NUMARC 93-01, Rev 2. ' Industry Guideline for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants'. Using the performance criteria recommended by NUMARC 93-01 for a 3 year historical performance review, and in accordance with industry practices, the following SSCs have been approved for a(1) status by the Expert Panel. SSCs in a(1): Reason: Ul PORVs - MPFF for PORV mis-assembly. UI & U2 RCP seals - Lost unit availability. U1 'C' AFW train for reliability - Three MPFFs in an 18 month period. UI & U2 4.16 Kv AC Switchgear - RMPFFs regarding breaker reliability. UI & U2 Emergency Diesel Generators - RMPFFs for governor performance . U1 B Emergency Diesel Generator - Unavailability hours and SBO triggers exceed performance criteria. The remaining SSCs within scope of the Maintenance Rule are meeting their performance criteria and therefore are placed in classificatien a(2). l l
)
1 Several SSCs currentiv in a(2) reauire heightened awareness to imorove eauinment nerformance. U1 HVAC ECCS dampers- Repetitive Maintenance Preventable component failures. U2 Radiation Monitoring - MPFFs for Control Room. RCB, and RAB monitors. UI & U2 CEDMs - Multiple instances of dropped CEAs. U2 TCV 13 Tw. MPFFs resulting in 2 manual reactor trips in 1996. Plant Level Performance Indicators During the month of June 1996, several Maintenance Preventable unplarmed Emergency Safety Features actuations occurred on Unit 1. The implications of these events will require additional review by the Maintenance Rule Expert Panel. l l The Maintenance Rule is effective for all SSCs on 10 July,1996. l
4 i
; ?
I. b l l j TABLE OF CONTENTS i I j l j Topic Section 4 MAINTENANCE RULE PROGRAM
SUMMARY
I 4 ST. LUCIE SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURES IN THE SCOPE OF THE MRULE 2 INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITIES FOR MRULE IMPLEMENTATION 3 PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE CRITERIA 4 SSCs in a(1) CLASSIFICATION 5 1 SSC PERFORMANCE HISTORY 6 i l MAINTENANCE RULE GLOSSARY OF TERMS 7 i I l s
i I SECTION 1 - MAINTENANCE RULE
SUMMARY
The objective of the rule is to provide reasonable assurance that structures, systems and components are capable of fulfilling their intended functions. in July 1991, the NRC issued 10 CFR 50.65," Requirements for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants." The NRC, along with the industry, realized that effective maintenance is essential to plant safety. The existing regulations did not provide a framework for evaluating the effectiveness oflicensees' programs. The Maintenance Rule requires utilities to monitor the performance or condition of the structures, systems or components (SSCs) against utility established criteria to provide reasonable assurance they will perform their intended function. It is characterized as a performance based rule which requires plants to focus on the results of maintenance programs and not the programs themselves. l Utilities must have the rule fully implemented by 10 July 1996. CHANGES TO PL ANT PRACTICES REOUIRED BY THE MAINTENANCE RULE.
- 1. Performance criteria will be established for each Maintenance Rule system. Systems will be monitored against performance criteria. Systems performing acceptably as demonstrated by meeting pre-established perfonnance criteria will be classified as (a)(2) systems. Systems I
having performance requiring improvement in reliability or availability will be classified as l (a)(1) systems. Those systems classified as (a)(1) will receive increased focus in the form of I engineering assistance and heightened management attention. l l l
- 2. The plant will continually assess the cumulative and instantaneous risk of removing SSCs )
frt .a service. l PERFORM ANCE CRITERI A There are two types. Plant Level Criteria & Specific Criteria. Maintenance Rule Systems are categorized into risk significant systems and non-risk significant systems. The risk significant systems have specific criteria. The non-risk significant systems have plant level performance criteria developed from guidance in NUMARC 93-01, current industry practice, and FPL Nuclear Division goals. The PRA Group in Engineering maintains a computer model which calculates the potential for core damage based on probability of equipment failures or personnel errors. This computer model,(called the Probabilistic Safety Assessment or PSA) along with a l site multi-discipline panel. determine which systems are risk significant. EXAMPLE: SYSTEM PERFORMANCE CRITERIA Reliability: Nc more than Two Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures / cycle. Unavailability: No more than 300 unavailable hours / cycle. i
s EXAMPLE: PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE CRITERIA No more tilan I auto trip / unit each year. No more than I safety system actuation / unit each year. No unplanned entries into outage high risk categories. HOW RISK WILL BE ASSESSED
- Unavailability will be monitored and controlled over time such that we do not increase the probability that the system will be out-of-service when we need it.
The work scheduling process will ensure undesirable configurations are avoided in the schedule. Outage Management will maintain an awareness that when systems unexpectedly become unavailable they must resolve unacceptable risk combinations expeditiously.
r SECTION 2 - SSCs WITHIN THE SCOPE OF TIIE MRULE.
- 1. Safety-related systems, structures and components.
- 2. Non-safety SSCs that:
- a. Are relied upon to mitigate accidents or transients.
- b. Are used in EOPs.
- c. Whose failure prevents safety-related functions.
- d. Cause scrams or actuate safety systems.
A listing of systems in scope and their performance criteria is shown on the next page. The components in scope of the Maintenance Rule are to numerous to list in this report. These may be found in the System Summaries listed under Key Components' A listing of structures in scope at St. Lucie are shown on the page following the systems listing. 1
r Maintenanca Rule Program Summary Piani Levee avananaty ind-duas Tram performance :r consa,on Rennesmy Rist Se' Svstem Systern & Communents Qsst Owner Cntena monacrea tast 18 mo Y 1i Fuet and CEAs RE Mead & Parts PLPC 1. 2 INPO FRI MPFF g 2 Y 1b Rosact Coosare System SCE Mendoza PLPC 1-5 PORVs A. P MPFF g 2 Y 2 CVCS SCE Young PLPC 4 A.B.C cng pos MPFF 12 Y 3a HPSI SCE kendas PLPC 1.3.4 AB MPFF g 2 Y 3D LPSI SCE Kenoes PLPC 1.3 4 AB MPFF g 2 Y 3c Sa6ety inrecuan Tanas SCE kendas PLPC 1.3 A.B.C.O MPFF g 2 l Y 7 Comamment Scray SCE Kenosa PLPC 1.3 A. B WVFg2 l Y 8 Men Steam SCE Wolover PLPC 13 MSIV A. 9 MPFF $ 2 Y 9a Mac Feeoneser SCE Green PLPC 13 MFIVS MPFF g 2 Y 9D Ausdaary Feoowater SCE Woesver PLPC 1. 3 A.B.C MPFF g 2 l Y 9c AFAS ISC Law & Keey PLPC 2.3 AF AS-1. 2 MPFF 3 2 Y 14 CCW SCE Milton PLPC 1.2 4 A. B MPFF g 2 l Y 17 b EDG Fust Od SCE Kutenti PLPC 3.4 A. 8 MPFF g 2 Y 18 b insbument Ae SCE Kendas DLPC 1.2 C. O MPFF g 2 Y 21 a 'CW SCE Mdion PLPC 1.4 A. B MPFF g 2 Y 25 A HVAC-Risk Signicant SCE Mendoza i LPC 1 00$ nrs/ tan MPFF g 2
- Y 47 A 480 VAC swgr & bars SCE Camones PLPC 1-4 SSC loads MPFF g 2 Y 48 120/208 vac SCE Carr.ocell SLPC 1,2 SSC loads MF/F 52 Y 49 120 V4al VAC cverters SCE Dean PLPC 1-4 MA.B.C.D MPFF52 Y 50 125 VOC & cnargers SCE Wachtel PLPC 1-4 A. B MPFF g 2 Y 52 416kw swgr & bars SCE Campeen PLPC 14 AB & SSC loads MPFF g 2 Y 53 Generanon & Distneuten SCE Wishams & Campces PLPC 14 A4B S/V ufmrs MPFF 3 2 Y 59 EOGs SCE Kunavicn PLPC 1.3 4 A. B. Inggers MPFF32 Y 63 RPS t&C Scted & Hegal PLPC 2.3 SD LCO nrs MPFF g 2 Y 68 Contamment Peestratens OST Soscome PLPC 1. 4 -LRT4LLRT MPFF g 2 Y 69 ESFAS & Annuncators i&C Snennan & Newncuse DLPC 2-4 6 SA.SS MPFF52 N 4 Fuee Pool SCE Young PLPC 4 5 MPFF g 2 N 6 Waste Managmers SCE Young PLPC 5 MPFF g 2 N 10 Entrachon Steam SCE Woiaver PLPC 1-2 N 11 Heaser Drams mio Vents SCE Green PLPC 12 N 12 a Concensate SCE Green PLPC 1.2 N 13 Turnee Ccoung water SCE Maton PLPC 12 N 17 a Turbee LuDe Od SCE Wotaver PLPC 1.2 N 19 Condensate Pohsneg SCE Green PLPC 1.2 N 21 b Cetulateg Water SCE Smit PLPC 1.2 N 22 Turtee SCE Wolaver PLPC 1.2 N 23 a SGBO Rad Monitoreg l&C Gusmano PLPC 5 MPFF g 2 N 25 9 HVAC Non Risa SCE Mendoza PLPC 1.2 MPFF g 2 N 25 n ECCS orses SCE xendan PLPC 5 MPFF g 2 N 26 Radialen Merutonng l&C Gusmano PLPC 3 5 MPFF12 N 27 a Hydrogen Anaeyzer i&C Kytre & Scrime PLPC1 MPFF g 2 N 27 D Hyoregen Recemoners SCE Wacritel PLPC1 MPFF g 2 N 37 Ullenme Heat Sen vatwes OST Soscente PLPC1 MPFF g 2 N 46 6 9 kv swgr & tars SCE Campoea FLPC 12 N 47 8 440 VAC swgr & bars SCE Camoces PLPC 1-2.4 N 60 Staten Groundag SCE Cnart PLPC13 MPFF g 2 ,
1 N 62 Reactor Regulatog l&C Scfmd & KeDy PLPC 13 MPFF g 2 N 64 Nucisar ins rumentaten l&C Scnmd & Heigel PLAC 1-3 MPFF g 2 N 66 CECM l&C $nerman & Newnouse PLPC 12 N 67 Fuel Handing CST Dady PLPC1 N 70 CSPOS I&C Huber & Ordway PLPC1 MPFF12 N 73 Structures Eng Honowed PLPC 1 tespecuans MPFF 1O N 74 Poiar Crane Eng Berser PtPC1 N 75 Cathode Protecen SCE Clart PLPC 1 MPFF 3 2 plant LEVEL P80FORVANCE CRITEP?A l
\
PLPC 1- Unptanneo unavadaoety less enan or eque to 5% fe eacn unit last 12 montns PLPC 2a Unosanned automate reactor inos sess enan or ecuas to 1 for tne sne for last 12 monms PLPC 2D Unosanneo maiuaireactor inos less man or eous to 2 eacn une for tast 12 montns j PLPC 3 Unntanned ESF Actuatens less inan or sous to 1 eacn unit for tast 12 rnones DLOC 4 Unptenneo ' Red
- SSA ounng iess man 1 eacn cutage Pt.PC 5 Unoianneo reocrtace redcegicas reiease ess tnan or eaaan to 1 frorn me site cunng tne inst 12 montns DLPC 6 Unpsanneo reportaow loss of annunciaton e the contros room est man or ecuas to 1 tast 12 montns Aroetiewe Mactenance %entacee Functenal Fadures less enan 1 per 36 menms aposes to ail SSCs and may o-.a. utween taes unas or crerent systems evernng smiar cornoonents
( C EPN'TIONS 8 PC Piant Leven Performance Cmena MPFF Mantenance Preventaose Funciens FJdure ! A MPFF - Recetative Mactenance preventab*e Funacnal Failure ! Avadaosary Tracaso by OOL eg Pours e Moces 13 onry. totas over prevous 18 mones Rehabety - Tracted e ALL moces MPFF g 2 on aiy tr23 tran m any 18 morwn pened g p Eisecameness of prooiem somng RMPFF < 1 m any 36 mome pened Revison 2 s 7/9/96 Micnael yder
t Structures included in PSL Maintenance Rule Monitorina Proaram Reactor Building: ! Shield building l Containment Vessel Interior Structure Reactor Auxiliary Building Fuel Handling Building ( Steam Trestle l Diesel Generator Building Intake Structure l Component Cooling Area Structures., including pipe trenches Ultimate Heat Sink Dam i Refueling Water Tank & Foundation l l , i Condensate Storage Tank j l l Condensate Storage Tank Shielding i l 1 Diesel Oil Storage Tank Diesel Oil Storage Tank Pumphouses j Turbine Building I Flood Protection Stop Logs ( Unit 2 RAB and South door on East wall) l Main Transformer Barrier Walls & Foundations ; Start-Up Transformers Barrier Walls & Foundations Auxiliary Transformers Foundations ! Cooling Canals: Intake Head Wall intake Pipe Line intake Velocity Cap Seal Well Structure
- Discharge Head Wall i Discharge Piping l
l l t
f SECTION 3 - INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITIES FOR MRULE IMPLEMENTATION Maintenance Personnel:
- 1. Understand Maintenance Rule terms & definitions.
- 2. Using Condition Reports, identify issues that could potentially cause a problem for personnel performing maintenance activities.
- 3. For corrective maintenance, clearly document in the Journeymen's Work Report the as found equipment conditions and steps taken to restore the system to service.
Operations Personnel:
- 1. Understand Maintenance Rule terms & definitions.
- 2. Using Condition Reports identify all safety system functional failures to ensure a root ,
cause determination is made. l l System Owners:
- 1. Understand Maintenance Rule terms & definitions.
- 2. Understand how St. Lucie's Maintenance Rule program works.
- 3. Perform root cause determinations for SSC functional failures.
- 4. Track unavailability (OOS hours) for selected risk significant systems.
- 5. Track functional failures for SSCs.
- 6. Determine if functional failures are MPFFs.
- 7. Prepare quarterly updates on SSC reliability and availability.
Expert Panel members:
- 1) Ensure consistent implementation of 10CFR50.65.
- 2) Review performance of SSCs with select owners.
- 3) Review SSC functional failures root causes and corrective actions as appropriate.
- 4) Review all SSCs for dispositioning between a(1) and a(2) status.
- 5) Review the quarterly Maintenance Rule reports prior to their issuance.
- 6) Review the annual Maintenance Rule assessment reports pnor to their issuance.
i l Other St. Lucie Plant Employees:
- 1. Understand Maintenance Rule terms & definitions.
t SECTION 4 - PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE CRITERIA Plant Level Performance Criteria for: 1) Unit Unavailability,2) Reactor Trips, and 3) Unplanned ESF Actuations are detailed on the attached performance charts. A brief summary is provided below for the remaining and satisfactory Plant Level Performance Criteria since there is less than one data point each in: 4) Unplanned Red Safety System Assessments,5) Unplanned NRC reportable radiological releases, and 6) Unplanned NRC reportable loss of annunciation. UNPL ANNED ' RED' SAFETY ASSESSMENTS WHILE SHUTDOWN During modes 5 and 6, the Shift Technical Advisors perform an assessment of 7 plant safety functions twice per day. Using the NEI methodology of defense in depth, each safety function is assigned one of four colors to signify the redundancy of equipment available to support a given safety function. Condition Red' for the Shutdown Safety Assessments (SSAs)is a prohibited condition. mA The limit for this Plant Level Performance Criteria is to have no ' Red' SSAs per year for each unit. Since 1993, there has been no Red SSAs during modes 5 and 6 due to a Maintenance Preventable issue. UNPL ANNED. REPORTABLE RADIOLOGICAL RELEASES The limit for this Plant Level Performance Criteria is no more than 1 unplanned. reportable radiological release for the site each year due to a Maintenance Preventable issue. Over a three year period, there has been one instance of an unplanned, reportable radiological release that was due to a Maintenance Preventable Cause. On 19 August.1995, the Primary Water Tank was overfilled due to operator error and a historically unreliable Level Control Valve. Approximately 11,000 gallons of water with tritium overflowed onto the ground. None of the release left the site. UNPLANNED REPORTABLE LOSS OF ANNUNCI ATION IN THE CONTROI ROOM l The limit for this Plant Level Performance Criteria is no more than 1 unplanned. reportable radiological release for the site each year. Over a three year period. there have been no instances of an unplanned. NRC reportable loss of control room annunciation that was due to an Maintenance Preventable Cause.
1. SSC PERFORMANCE mDICATOR l PLPC 1: Unplanned lost availability Updated: 7/9/96 18:35 i Unit: 1 l Performance Criteria: PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. 1 Uncianned Unavailability in Davs ( l Unit 1 Unplanned Lost Availability Due to Equipment Problems 100 00 NM c c 80 00 70 00 j 60 00 ' Unit 1 7 50 00
-+-- Total
[ 40 00 30 00 irnst - 18 daystyr 20 00 . 10 00 0 00
^ ^ ^ ^
03 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 % 96 Penod DETAILS: Sep 93 (1.5 dcys) 18 Main feed water pump Feb 95 (9 days) Quench tank In- Leaking Jul 95 (1 day) RPS "C" wide range Aug 95 ( 17 days) RCP 1 A2 Seal Aug 95 (14 days) CS FCV-07 Aug 95 (8 days) PORV assembly, (maintenance preventable) Sep 95 (25 days) Code safety flange Sep 95 (1 day) 181 SIT Accumulator Sep 95 (7 days) 1 A Emergency Diesel Generator, (maintenance preventable) Sep 95 (8 days) 18 Emergency Diesel Generator, (maintenance preventable) Sep95 (1 day) CVCS , valves V2427.28 Oct 95 (0 5 day) Excore Nuc Inst Oct 95 (1 day) 18 Heater Drain Pumo Nov 95 (1 day) Main feed water reg Viv Feb 96 (2.5 days) CEA-20 & 47 drop Trends: Unplanned lost availability Plant Level Performance Cntena has been exceeded for Unit 1 pnmanly due to egipment problems occunng in 031995 The enart depicts all unplanned lost availability due to equipment problems. Those determined to have been from maintenance related causta are noted in the list of specfic events.
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR PLPC 1: Unplanned Lost Availability Upd:t:d: 7/9961842 Unit: 2 Performance Criteria:
)
PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. l I Unolanned Unavailability in Days Unplanned Lost Availability Due to Equipment Problems 100 00 . 80 70 Unit 2 ti g o 60 7 50
-+- Total 30
_,mit - 18 days /yr 20 10 ^ 0 = "
- 0- 0 0- : :- --
0 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 01 02 03 04 Q1 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Period DETAILS-Aug 1993 - (2 days) Condenser tube leak Sep 1993 - (1.4 days) Condenser tube leak Dec 1993 -(0.6 days) Condenser tube leak Feb 1995 - (3 days) Steam Generator level LT9011 failed caused low SG water level. Feb 1995 -(1 day) 2B MFW pump Mar 1995 -(1 day) 2A Heater Drain pump Aug 1995 -(1 day) Gen synch equip Sep 1995 -(3 days) Condenser back pressure control Dec 1995- (19 days) Reactor head "o" nng Dec 1995-(1 day) Reactor head gas vent system valves. Jan 1996 -(2 days) TCV-13-15 caused high cold gas temp. in Main Generator.(Maintenance Preventable) Jan 1996 - (3 days) Low pressure feed flow control Apr 1996 -(0 5 day) Turbine Test Problems Apr 1996 - (15 day) Water box pipe repair of galvanic corrosion. Jun 1996 - (2.5 days)TCV413-15 failed due to feedback arm uncoupling. (Maintenance Preventable) Jun 1996 -(5 days) 2C AFW pumo warm up pipe modification Jun 1996 -(1 day) MFW reg valve control. (Maintenance Preventable) Trends: Unplanned lost availability Plant Level Performance Cntena has been exceeded for Unit 2 pnmarily due to Reactor head O ong problem identification and replacement occunng in 041995
t PLPC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR ' PLPC: 2a & 2b - Reactor Trips - Automatic and Manual Updated: 7/9/96 16:29 Unit: 1 and 2 Performance Criteria: PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equa! to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PEACTOR TRIPS: (Automatic and Manual Reactor Trips that were Maintenance Preventable) C"" lUnit 1 auto i i Maintenance Preventable Reactor Trips E==munit i man : 4 M Unit 2 auto
- Unt 2 man :
--+-- Total auto 3
-e--Tot U1 man *
, --+--Tot U2 mani j2 - - . - =
= Limit 12 man tnps/yr.
52 1 ,,, _ _ . . , ,, . , - Limit 11 autc Eps/yr.
) / /
0 _
/ ; ;. '-
=
=
l 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 64 Q1 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Period DETAILS: UNIT 1, S:p 1993 (Man) - Trips to prevent equipment damage by jellyfish influx. Jan 1994 (Man)- Loss of 18 SGFPP caused by equipment failure.(Maintenance Preventable) Mit 1994 (Auto) - Wrong Unit breaker opened due to personnel error.(Maintenance Preventable) Apr 1994 (Auto) - CEDM bus overcurrent and undervoltage transient due to procedural error. Jun 1994 (Auto) - 1 A Main XFMR diff. current tnp due to contact with metal facia. Oct 1994 (Auto)- Lost load due to 240 kV switchyard transformer flasover.(Maintenance Preventable) Jul 1995 (Auto)- Personnel error dunng Turbine overspeed surveillance testing Nov 1995 (Man)- 1B Main Feedwater Reg Valve caused low SG water level.(Maintenance Preventable) Feb 1996 (Man)- CEA-20 dropped and Inst. Air Feedwater Reg. Valve air leak.(Maintenance Preventable) UNIT 2. May 1993 (Mann - CEDM drops due to Electncal Penetration failure.(Maintenance Preventable) Nov 1993 (Man)- High gas temp. in the Main Gen. caused by a procedural deficiency. Apr 1994 (Auto) - Bypass circuit miswinng dunng RPS functional testing Fzb 1995 (Auto) - Failed level transmrt'er caused low SG water level. Jan 1996 (Man)- TCV-13-15 caused high cold gas temp. In Main Generator.(Maintenance Preventable) Jun 1996 (Man)- TCV-13-15 failed due to feedback arm uncoupling. (Maintenance Preventable) Trends: This Plant Level Performance Cntena is currently being met.
s
/
SECTION 5 - SSC CURRENTLY IN a(1) CLASSIFICATION The next page summarizes the systems and components that have been identified during the three year historical review as meeting the criteria for a(1) classification. The Maintenance Rule Expert Panel has reviewed each of these conditions and approved the a(1) classification. Additionally, the Expert Panel has in conjunction with the System or Component Owners. identified the action plan for restoring the SSC to a(2), goals and monitoring methodology. These elements are summarized on the attached table. As of this date, there have been no SSCs previously listed in a(1) classification that subsequently were reassigned to a(2) classification. 5 l l l l 1
Maintenance Rule Category (a)(1) Status l { r /2/96 Action Plan Due Responsible Goal (s) Systern Structure. Reason for (a)(1) status , Individual Component (SSC) 1 Procedure development for U1/U2 Complete R Kulavich 1. No Ut failures of gov actuators ; 01 & U2 Repetitive MPFFs resulting in to require penodic Sverhaul due to aging thru 12/96 Emergency Desel Generator fadure to carry load Cause due 2 Perform overhaul for U2 Complete R Kufavich / EM 2. No U2 failures of gov actuators , governors t.t a 4 equate PM on governor? Complete R Kutavich / EM due to agmg thru 7/96 [ 3 Perform overhaul for Ut I 4 No failures of governor and R Kutavich 3. Gov control stable load while stable load control operating thru 12,96 1 Individualproblems were venfied Complete K Kutavich 1.12 rnenth ro!!rng total of OOS hrs 1B2 Emergency Dieset Unavaliablitty end rehability has to have addressed root cause to trend to less than 240 by 12/31/96. Generator exceeded performance enteria 12/31/96 2. Less than 5 start failures per 100 of OOS hrs and SBO togger values 2 For any addit onal start fadures or starts demands by 12/31/96 OOS hrs. an ERT wdl be initiated 1 Revise PM procedure for 416 kv Complete J Campbell 1. By 12/31/97,5 2 PMT failures U18 2 < 01 & U2 Repetitive MPFFs due to units dus to fir inpper or tatch check. ! 416 kw AC safety rettd floor inpper and latch check switch breakers to improve rehabddy 2 Use PSA to pnontize PM schedule Complete 2. No demand fanures by 12/31/97. Brsakers failuies, which can be addressed 3 Notify Trainmg to review floor inpper 12/31/96 3 All 416 bkrs PM'd for ttoor tnppers by improved PM for breakers and latch check problems w/EM and latch check switch by 12/31/97. 1 Improve testing steps m 1-M-0037 10/30/98 T. Sanders Two successful bench. Post Maint U1 PORVs A MPFF resulted in PORV tests, and in Senrice Tests following i unavailability exceedmg l 2 Improve teshng to ensure solenrod (Next U1 the next PORV rebuild i their performance cutena j
& circuitry SAT pnor to LTOP. refuehng)
Tram Reliability has exceeded 1 Upgrade the SMB-000 actuator PM 8/3/96 J Cook 1. No SMB-000 actuator PMT contactor U1 C AFW train failures after new PM implemented for i performance criteria for to include as found/as left resistance check to ensure proper contact cleanmg 18 rnonth penod Maintenance Preventable 2 Upgrade the U1 EGR PM to mclude 8/3/96 M Wotaver 2 No as found out of spec EGR F unctionat Fadures r resistance check for proper mspection resistance checks for 18 months . 1 Revise SU seat changeout PM 11/30t% M. Snyder 1. Monthly trend of all RCP seal l 01 & U2 Reactor Coolant Unplanned U1 unavailability l exceeded m 1995, in part. due to frequency to no more than 2 cycles stage pressure breakd os to show j r> ump seats 2 SCE will eva!uate 2nd cycle use of B Kelly improved performance with shorter runs faded 1 A2 RCP seal Sil seats at each refuehng downpower 2 RCP seal changeouts every other 3 Submit REA br potential upgrace to 7/10/96 B Kelly refuehng cycle ! I more rugged N9000 seat design l I Categgry [a}{1) . Mamtenance Rule Systems. Structures. and Components (SSCs) determined to have UNACCEPTABLE performance based on Maintenance Rufe performance monitonng l (a)(1) refers to the appkcable paragraph in 10CFR50 65 MPH (Mamtenance Preventable FunctionalI > , 3) - Failure of a SSC to perform its intended function that should have been prevented by the performance of appropriate maintenarice actions. Structure mor*nng is an important part of Mair.tenance Rule performance monstonng Monitonng of otant structures is done by all employees is es done during operation rounds. d be identifed on a Work Request and/or Condition Report , matenal cor mspections, system engineer walkdowns, etc Degraded structural performance
1
- PLPC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR PLPC: 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations Updated: 7/9/96 16.34 Unit: 1 and 2 Performance Criteria:
PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. FSF ACTUATIONS: (Unplannned ESF Actuations that were Maintenance Preventable) Maintenance Preventable ESFAS Actuations ) 4 munit 1
~~ Unit 2 3 : -
- Total Unit 1:
2 , f2 -
-m-Total Unit 2: '
1 Limit $1/12 mos. O _ _ = = _ = = = _ 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 01 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Periods DETAILS. UNIT t Nov 1993 (ESFAS)- CIAS dunng mode 1 Rad Monitor ch. in tnp with additional module failure.(Maintenance Preventable) Jan 1994 (EDG) - 1 A3 bus loadshed dunng UV relay replacement.(Mainienance Preventable) Nov 1994 (ESFAS)- SIAS dunng mode 5 due to pressure transmitter.(Maintenance Prevemable) Nov 1994 (ESFAS) - CIAS with channel D inp and Instrument inverter failure.(Maintenance Preventable) Feb 1995 (EDG)- 1 A3 bus loadshed dunng UV relay replacement (Maintenance Pruentab!e) Aug 1995 (ESFAS)- MSIS actuation signal was received due to failure to block the signal as required Mar 1996 (EDG)- Inadvertent start of the 1B EDC dunng PCM implem, due to personnel error.(Maintenance Preventable) Jun 1996 (EDG)- Inadvertent start of the 18 EDG dunng CIAS test due to LTA UV test procedure IMaintenance Preventable) Jun 1996 (ESFAS) Unplanned CIAS and SlAS actuaton. Jul 1996 (ESFAS) Unplanned RAS and CS actuation UNIT 2. May 1993 (EDG)-inadvertent start of the 2B EDG dunng Safeguards relay test due to personnel error 1 Maintenance Preventable) ItalldL ESFAS actuations Plant Level Performance Cntena limit for M2.ntenance Preventable events has been exceeded on Und 1 this quarter and will require additional review for causes and corrective actions l
~ l t I 1
. i SECT ON 6 -SYSTEMS, STRUCTURES & COMPONENTS PERFORMANCE 1 i The attached Figure 2's summarize the past performance of SSCs under the scope of the Maintenance Rule at St. Lucie plant. An example with explanation is shown below. SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 59 - Emerg. Diesel Gens. Updated: 11 Apn!,1996
'Jnit: 2 me ,
Performance Critena! [ Performance Unavailability: / Criteria i
<240 hrs /yr per train OOS (4 Ott. rolling total) 8teliability: 5 2 MPFFs per train per 18 mone nannti ( for the SSC I Start Test / Load /Run: 3/20;4/50;5/100 Qd l PLPC 3: Unptanned ESF Actuation's 51 per untt. w PLPC 4: 0 unplanned " red" SSA dunng outages .
OOS hours in Modes 1-3 / O _ (except for EDGs) s 5 UNAVAfLABILfTY: (As reported to INPO) 4 2 f . Unit 2 EDG Unavailable Hours Limit 240 hrstyr 50 " g l 45.00 unavailability g N: 30.00 Cumulative OOS hours II"I' l h ' ' 25.00 -
- C 20.00 ,
{
,,.* I 2A EDGI ! #h 1s.00
.EDG A
Q2 95 Q3 95 , f Y --e- - 2B EDG ' , D pm Quarterly OOS hours /
._m d i RFt I ABfLTTY: List all failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), correcove actions and MPFFs: All Functional 11/4/95 - 2A EDG failed to start on oemand. Problem found to be witn Curts relay sockets y Failures in a -
12/14/94 - 2A 12<:yt engtr.a did not load due to mech. binding of govem. at:t, affecting speed control (MPFF) 3 year period - PLANT L8~WL PERFORMANCE: M on j Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeced determine if SSC was cause Plant Level ( Performance 2
%w _
% w Innda Performance Trends, '
The EDGs are rn (a)(1) due to failures witn the govemor actuators See Fig 4 attached to STAR # ,
/' Explanations or recen 960024 for goal setung ano monttonng acuvities. - industry information
.wJ
- l t
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 1a + Fuel and CEAs Updated: 7/8/96 9.03 Unit 1 SSC Owner: Mead & Parks Department: RE Performance Criteria? Fuel Reliability: INPO Fuel Reliability Indicator Reliability. < 2 MPFFs / system per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. CONDITION' i Unit 1 Fuel Reliability Indicator l 5 00E-03 Limit <4 50E-03 ucigm
- l 3 4 00E-03 a
{ 300E 03 l 5 l 2.00E 03 4
$ t 00E-03 E " U"" - -
O00E+00 ' a<n e O z o , w a 2 < 2 ' ' o O z o 3 2m " < 0 Z O ' $ I i Penod f ; i REllABILITV' List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs) and MPFFs' There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system during this review panod i l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE ! Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause l No PLPC 1 exceedence attributed to Fuel Cladding
' Note INPO Goal- representative of the maximum iodine release expected from one high power. open ,
defect failed fuel rod CRI provides a normalized RCS lodine activity value indicative of fuei failure. l Trends / Recent PM Chanaea / Recent industry Operatina Experience: l No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review period
- SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR Updated: 7/8/96 16.50 SSC: 1a- Fuel and CEAs Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Mead & Parks Department: RE Performance Criteria:
Fuel Reliability: INPO Fuel Reliability Indicator 3 Reliability 5,2 MPFFs / system per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than of equal to 5% for each unit. Last 12 months. PLPC 2a Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor trips less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. CONDITION' Unit 2 Fuel Relability indicator I urnit <4 50E-03 uc/gm l y
$ 4 00E-03 2.
( 3 00E-03 5 l 100E43
.s l
S t 00E43 I E ---
~ "" l
" 000E+00 s w s < < v> o z o ; u. }
;; < vi o z o e; w s < s e e
Penod RELIABlUTV List all functional failures tindicate train for risk sig SSOs) and MPFFs. There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system during this review period PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No F .PC 1 exceecence attributed to Fuel Cladding
- N ot e- INPO Goat - representative of the maximum iocine reiease expected from one nigh power ooen defect failed fuel rod FRI provides a normalized RCS locine activity value indicative of fuel failure.
Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industrv Operatino Experience: No aaverse or significant trends were noted during the review pened g3
y l SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 1 l SSC: 1b - Reactor Coolant System Updated: 7/8/96911 i Unit: 1 ' SSC Owner: Mendoza Performance Criteria: Department: SCE ; Unavailability PORVs. 5 7 hrs /yr OOS U1, 5 877 hrs /yr OOS U2 l Reliabihty. 5 2 MPFFs / system per 18 months l PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less tnan or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unrt for last 12 months PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. PLPC 5 - Unplanned, reportable radiological release less than or equal to 1 from the site during the last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY Unit 1 PORVs Unavailable Hours j unit 1 PORVs determined to be inoperable for 9 months l due to misassembN dunnahtl 94 outaae (LER 95-oSi V1402l l l 25 00 - : - ltI 20 x . g ! i 15 M - . -e-v t 4o4 i
^ '
$ 10 00 _
- - - - ~. -
urnit - 7 hrs /yr, 0 00 : : : _ _ = = Q3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 Q2 03 C4 Q1 02 93 93 94 94 S4 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod
- Unavailability hrs reset (zercedi foliowing recair & testing of PORVs RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs) and MPFFs 8/3/95 - V1402 would not stroke on demand. Improper reassemble cunng last maint. (MPFF) 8/3/95 - V1404 would not stroke on demand. Improper reassemble cunng last ms.nt. ( MPFF)
PLANT LEVEL CEREORM ANCE RCS contneuted 50 days lost availability wnich was a major factor in Unit 1 exceeding its 1995 EAF goals The failures with V-1402 and V 1404 resulted in 8 days of lost availability The fe' lures with the 1 A2 RCP Seals resulted in 7 days lost avadabdity 4/5/93 - RCP seal leak (0.5gpm) 4th stage of 1 A2 RCP due to stuck U-cup en snaft sleeve. Unit eff-line 8/2/95 - 1 A2 RCP seal failures during snutdown for Hurr. Enn improper staging of sea:s 4/30/96 - 1 A2 RCP seal failure dunng cooldown The failures with the Code Safety Viv seat leakace resulted m 10 davs lost avadaodrty 2/8/95 - V-1200. V-1201 seat leakage (STAR #94120538) Design problem. 9/30/95 - V.1200. V1201. V1202 seat leakage (SCE 95-009 STARS 951269. 951252. 951224 lHE 95-63) The failure w'th Code Safety Valve V1201 flance leakace resulted in 25 davs lost availabdiv 9/11/95 - V-1201 flange leakage. Cause - Less than optimum gasket specified Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: l 8/95 ' Unit 1 POR5/s failed functional testing and were subsecuently found to have the va!ve disc guides installed in I reverse ' position Improper maintenance work and inadequate procedure Unit 1 continues to have seat leakage problems with the code safety valves due to design issues The valves were replaced at the end of cycle 13 with an upgraded design
W SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 1b - Reactor Coolant System Updated: 7/8/96 9:59 Unit: e SSC Owner: Mendoza Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Unavailability: PORVs. 5 7 hrs /yr OOS U1. 5 877 hrs /yr OOS U2 R1 liability: 5 2 MPFFs / system per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor inps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor trips less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red
- SSA dunng less than 1 each outage.
PLPC 5 Unplanned, reportable radiological release less than or equal to i from the site dunng the last 12 mo ths. UNAVAILABILITY: Unit 2 PORVs Unavailable Hours t.wrat 877 hrs /yr. 100.00 75.00 - V1474 m 50.00 - V1475 i I --+ - V1474 25.00 -e--V1475
~
0.00 = = = = ; ! N = 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 I 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Period l RELIABILITY List all functional failures Ondicate train for nsk sig. SSCs) and MPFFs- l l l Deoradations-3/16/94 - Pzr upper nozzles show bonc acid leakage. Cause noted as defiencies from prev. repair 3/2/93 - Pzr upper nozzles (4) cracked. Stress corrosion craciang. Delayed start-up. l 1/2/93 - 2A1 RCP cracks on purnp shaft. Unit shut down. Cause noted as improper sealinjection use. 7/8/94 - 2B1 RCP oil levelinstrument leak resulted in unit shutdown. 9/2E!95 - 2A2 RCP mech. seal face separation. Mgmt decision to shut down. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE. The failures with the Pzr nozzles from PWSCC in alloy 600 for 93 and 94 resulted in delayed start-ups.
- The fat'ure with the 2A1 RCP shaft resutted in 48 days lost availability.
RCP seat failures have resui:W in lost unit availability. Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent Industry Ooeratine Exceneact No adverse or signrficant trends were noted dunng the review penod.
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 2 - CVCS Updated: 7/8/96 9.46 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Young Performance Criteria: Department: SCE Unavailability- U1 & U2 5 679 b s/yr per cnarging pump A. B. C Reliability: 5 2 MPFF;l'ra:a per 18 months PLPC 4 Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. UNAVAILABILITY Unit 1 CVCS Unavailable Hours Limit 679 hrvyr. 600,00 f 500.00 g 400 00 - , li a1A TRNl i
- E 300 00 -
p el , '4,g , _ " ' A . . g . .
- im1B TRNI 200 00 , , . - > _
;;; __ , _g ,,, 4 '
_ ,, g_,., ,g M1C TRNI
'l _I* #~
100 00 -
- w-ame E-- 8' d " E_ a - l
- 5a
-. ei 0 00 - - & 1 A TRNI 03 04 Q1 Q2 Q3 04 Q1 02 Q3 04 Q1 02 total 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 --G--- 1 B TR N i ,
total Period 3
- 1 C TRNI ,
total t RELIABILITY: List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs Train C 3/27/94 - CHG-1C worn plunger, rebuilt pump PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE PLPC 4 None Trends / Recent PM thances / Recent industry Operatino Excerience: No adverse or significant trenos were noted dunng the review penod
e
- SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 2 - CVCS Updated: 78/96948 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Young Department: SCE Performance Criteria:
Unavailability- U1 & U2 5 679 hrs /yr per charging pump A. B. C Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 montns PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. UNAVAILABILITY i Unit 2 CVCS Unavailable Hours 35w w ,,,,,,,,,, . 3000 00 , 2500 00 - ,.' ,A y 2000 00 ,' ,,
$ 1500 00 - g' .el ., , A2A TRN 1000 00 - ,, . , . ' ,{ o. . - o .- . . o . '. Lirnit - 679frs/yr l 2BTRNI 3
~bk -
T-~ m h-_b~ N -.-- - i C:ElEl2C TRN 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 - +_ . 2A TRN l 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 l 93 Penod
-G-- M N I j gg i
-k *2 l TfN l 4
R ELI ABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs: l l
)
SSC Train { Train A 1/3/94 - CHG-2A .. v flow. rebuilt pump. 9/9/94 - V2555 V culd not close. replaced limit switch (MPFF) 10/24/94 Breaker 41261 faulty, replaced HGA relay Train B 1/31/93 - CHG-25 low flow recullt pump. 6/7/94 - CHG-2B Would not start, faulty breaker 40508. adjusted breaker latch rods 7/14/95 - CHG-2B low flow rebuilt pump. 1/1/96 - V2168 Check vaive leaked by seat. rebuilt valve Train C 1/17/94 - CHG-2C low flow. replaced internal valves PLANT LEVEL rERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeced determine if SSC was cause PLPC 4 None Trends / Recent PM chanaes / Recent industry Operatina Experience: Excess unavailability in 1994 is mostly oue to on line preventive maintenance
- l SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
, SSC: 3a - HPSI Updated: 7/8/96 11:10 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Kendall Department: SCE EgIfppnanc.e Crith ! Unavailability: U1 & U2 5 00 1 hrs /yr per train A. B l Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or ecual to 5% for each unit,last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 rnonths PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. , 1 1 UNAVAILABILITV (as reported to INPO) l Unit 1 HPSI Unavailable Hours 250 00 l 200 00 j '% , Limit - 100 nrs/yr ! = 150 00 - l B / g
- E 100 00 /
\
,A - 1 A TRN l 50.00 - - - F '+ . - , d 0 00 IB M Q3 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 03 04 Q1 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 95 96 - -+-- - 1 A TRN Penod total
-m-- 1 B TRN total RELIABILITY- List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs:
l There were two MPFF's on pump breakers. which are included on system 52 (6/28/94.1/23/95L l There are no Functional Failures or MPFF's on this system during this review penod t Degracations' Q1'96 OOS Hrs. attnbuted to ECCS suction header leak repair (not a MPFF) l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: 1 Report PLPC If PLPC exceeoed determine if SSC was cause i i PLPC 3- No unplanned ESF Actuations PLPC 4- No unplanned " red" SSA dunng outages. Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industrv Ooeratina Excenence: Excess unavailability in 1994 is mostly due to on line preventive maintenance e
SSC PERI'ORMANCE INDICATOR SSC; 3a - HPSI Updated: 7/8/96 11:10 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Kendall Department: SCE Performance Criteria: l Unavailability: U1 & U2 5100 hrs /yr per train A, B Reliabihty-. 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. UNAVAILABILITY (as reported to INFO) Unit 2 HPSI Unavailable Hours l 250.00 ) 200 00 Limit - 100 hrs /yr
,, 150 00 i 5 \
o ) I 100 00 - ,,
^ "'
50.00 ,.' ' - + - * ,
.- s, / + . - + .
g _ m 2B TRN 0 00 h Es < 03 04 01 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 01 02 - # . 2A TRN - 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 16 total Period ---G-- 2B TRN total RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs There are no Functional Failures or MPFF's on this system dunng this review penod. 6 PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 3. No unplanned ESF Actuations. PLPC 4- No unplanned " red" SSA dunng outages Trends / RgLcent PM Chances / Recent Industry Ooeratina Exoerience: l Excess unavailab*ty in 1994 is mostly due to on I,ne preventive maintenance
l l Y( SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 3b - LPSI Updated: 7/8/96957 l Unit: 1 l l SSC Owner: Kendall l Department: SCE l Performance Criteria-Unavailability: U1&U2 5168 hrs /yr per train. A. B ; Reliability 12 MPFFs / train per 18 months l l PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. j PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months l PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. l l UNAVAILABILITY (as reported to INPO) I Unit 1 LPSI Unavailable Hours 280 00 i l 240 00 ! i 200.00 Limit 168 hrs,y ! j 160 00 'e_ , ,, p , _ ,
$ 120 00 - *
, s s
l 80 00
/ ./
o C.- l 85 b N '*""' 03 Q3 Q1 Q2 Q3 04 Q1 Q2 Q3 04 Q1 G2 "! 93 94 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 - +- 1 A TR N Penod total
--G-- 1 E TR Ni i totat j l R EllABILITY- List all functional failures lindicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs l
l Train A l 5/4/95 - V3206 breaker 41277 failed, new line starter installed Train B 9/27/94 - LPSI-1B breaker 20406 failed. adjusted breaker PLANT LEVEL PEAFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeceo determine if SSC was cause r PLPC 3 No unciann'ed ESF Actuations l PLPC 4 No unplanned " red" SSA dunng outages i I Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent indurtry Operatina Expertence: Excess unavailability in 1994 is mostly due to on line preventive maintenance 4 Q196 OOS Hrs attnbuted to ECCS suction header leak repair Inot a MPFF) No adverse or significant trenos were noted during tne review period i l t
- SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR Updated: 7/9/96 8:42 SSC: 3b - LPSI Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Kendall Department: SCE Performance Criteria:
Unavailability: U1&U2 5168 hrs /yr per train: A,8 Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. UNAVAILABILITY (as .eported to INPO) Unit 2 LPSI Unavailable Hours > 280 00 240 00 200 00
~' Y' g 160 00 _
- s
$ 120 00
~ A 80 00
'N.,.-+.,' A2A TRN 40 00 s' '
g" " ] " - I m28 TRN O 00 Q3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 - +- 2A TRN total 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Period tbl RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: 2/21/96 - LPSI 2B pump gas bound dunng ASME code run PLANT LEVEL PERFORM ANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 3: No unplanned ESF Actuation's. PLPC 4 No unplanned " red" SSA dunng outages. Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Ooeratina Exoenence: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod. PMAl-96-03096 for self venting modification to prevent gas binding
e SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 3c - Safety injection Tanks Updated: 7/8/96 13:09 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Kendall Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Unavailability: 512 hrs /yr combined totals for A. B, C & D Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned uriavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 montns. PLPC 3 Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY- Modes 1,2 3* (* Pzt. pressure a 1750 psia) Unit 1 Si Tanks Unavailable Hours 15 00 Limit 12 hrs /yr. 10 00 1A1 5 00 Q 1A2 181 0 00 : : 0 t = = = = = = = = m 182 Q3 04 Q1 Q2 03 Q4 Q1 02 03 Q4 Q1 02 --e- Totavyr, 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this review period. PL NT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeoed determine if SSC was cause Irgnds I Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Ooeratino Exoenence: No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review penod. i l l
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 3c - Safety injection Tanks Updated: 7/8/96 10.53 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Kendall Department: SCE Perfermance Criteria: Unavailability: $ 12 hrs /yr combined totals for A, B, C & D Reliability: $ 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months. PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY M:Kles 1,2. 3' (* P r. pressure 11750 psis) Unit 2 S1 Tanks Unavailable Hours 15 00 Limit - 12 hrs /r 10 00
$ =
#2A1 0
5 00 m 2B1 0 00 I- - EmmllB 2B2 03 04 Tm Wr Q1 02 03 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod j l l RELI ABILITY List all functional failures Ondicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: I There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system during this review penod. G1i l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Ooeratina Eznenence: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng tne review penod f
~ . . - .
I SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 4 - Fuel Pool . Updated: 7/8/96 10:41 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Young Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Reliability: 3,2 MPFFs / system per 18 months PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. PLPC 5 - Unplanned, reportable radiological release less than or equal to 1 from the site dunng the last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeced due to this SSC dunng the review pened FAILURES List all failures, corrective actions anc MPFFs' No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review pened Trends I Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review period. E __ m _
' SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 4 - Fuel Pool Updated: 7/8/96 10:54 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Young Department: SCE l
Performance Criteria: Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / system per 18 months PLPC 4 Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. f PLPC 5 Unplanned, reportable radiological release less than or eaual to 1 frone the site dunng the last 12 months. l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE- l Report PLPC if PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC during the review period. FAILURES List all failures. corrective actions and MPFFs: No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review penod Cegradations 6/18/96 - Fuel pool punfication son exenanger retention element failed Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review penod 6' I I
_ ._- _ _ __ _ . _ _ - . . _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ . . . _ _ . _ ___m _,. SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR [ SSC: 6 - Waste Managment Updated: 7/8/96 11:00 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Young Department: SCE Performance Criteria Rehability: 12 MPFFs / system per 18 months PLPC 5 - Unplanned, reportable radiological release less than or equal to 1 from the site dunng the last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Piant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod FAILURES List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs No functional failures or MPFFs were ioentified dunng the review pe.'iod. Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: No aoverse or significant trends were noted during the review period. i t a t e I J 4 i 4 t ( 4
.. -. _ _ ~ . _
l t SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 1 l I 1 l l SSC. 6 - Waste Managment Updated: 7/8/96 11 04 Unit: 2 i SSC Owner: Young l Department: SCE l Performance Criteria-Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / system per 18 months PLPC 5 - Unplanned. reportable radiological release less than or equal to 1 from the srte during the last 12 months. j PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE _ i Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded dete mme if SSC was cause j No Plant Level Performance Critena exceeded due to this SSC during the review period l FAILURES List all failures. corrective actions and MPFFs. No functional failures or MPFFs were identified during the review penod l l Degradations l 2/20/96 - Unplanned gas release (not reportable) due to failure of the 2B waste gas compressor (MPFF) l I l Trends I Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review penod l , 6 l l 4 Page 1
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 7 - Containment Spray Updated: 7/8/96 12:33 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Kendall Department: SCE Performance Criteria:- Unavailability: U; & U2 5168 hrs / yr per train Re strioitity: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY- Modes 1,2. 3* (* Pzt. pressure 11750 psia) i Unit i Containment Spray Unavailable Hours
. 180 00 . ...... _ _ _ _. Limit - 168 hrstyr 140 00 '
120 00 f 100.00 , 00 00 _ y
- j. 4 40 00 5 -1A 20.00 $ \ '
i " TRN m1B 0 00 04 02 03 04 Q1 02 Q3 04 Q1 02 03 Q1 ~**I^ ! 95 95 96 96 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 t N ,' Period ---#-- 18 i t% 1 REllABILITY: List all fune:ional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this review penod. Deoradations' , l Q196 OOS Hrs. attnbuted to ECCS suction header leak repair (not a MPFF) l l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: 1 Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 1: Inadvertent Containment Spray actuation in Aug 95. resufting in 14 days lost availability PLPC 3: 7/96 - Unpianned RAS and CSAS. 1 l l Trends / Re.cg.cif M Chana ?s I Recent industry Ooeratina Exoerience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod. 1
- S$p PERFORMANCE INDICATOR Updated: 7/8/96 12:33 SSC: 7 Containment Spray Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Kendall Department: SCE Performance Criteria:
Unavailability: U1 & U2 5168 brs / yr per train Reliability: s 2 MPFFs / train per 18 montns PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unst for last 12 months. UNAVAILABillTY Modes 1. 2 3' (* Pzr cressure z 1750 osia) Unit 2 Containment Spray Unavailable Hours 180 00 Lirnit - 168 hrstyr 1 160 00 140 00 120 00 f:: 100 00 80 00 ,A, 60 00 ,. -s ,_g' '%.y_, - 40 00
,/
10 " 5 m , 03 04 02 03 04 Ot Q2 - +- 1 A TRN 03 04 Q1 02 Q1 total 95 95 95 95 96 96 93 93 94 94 94 94 Pened tot REll ABILE List all functional failures (indicate train for risk sig SSCs), and MPFFs SSC Train There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this review period PLANT LEVEL DERFORM ANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cauo-PLPC 1: <5% PLPC 3. none Lrtads I Recent PM Chao.ges I Recent Industry Opt.3tma r Expenence: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod I
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
- SSC: 8 - Main Steam , Updated: 7/8/96 16.51 .-. (
Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Wolaver Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Reliability; $ 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months Unavailabilrty: 110 hrs OOS for MSIVs, cumulative for both trains PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor trips less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. ' PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY- ! Unit 1 MSIVs Unavailable Hours i 12.00 Lirnst - 10 hrs /yr. M A TRN '- :c
$ 6 00 - l 3.00 - 8 TRN
' --G-- MSIV total i 0 00 - - : 7 : : : : : : : : Q3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 Q2 03 04 Ot Q2 j 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Period REllABILITY- List all functional failures (indicate train for risk sig SSCs), and MPFFs-There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system during this review penod PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a No unplanned automatic reactor top j PLPC 2b: No unplanned manual reactor tnp. PLPC 3: Unplanned ESF Actuation. Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trenos were noted during the review period
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 6 - Waste Managment Updated: 7/8/96 11:04 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Young Department: SCE Performance Criteria-Reliability: 12 MPFFs / system per 18 months PLPC 5 - Unplanned reportable radiological release less than or equal to 1 from the site during the last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC during the review period. FAILURES' List all failures. corrective actions and MPFFs. No functional failures or MPFFs were identified ouring the review penod. Degradations 2/20/96 - Unplanned gas release (not reportable) due to failure of the 2B waste gas compressor (MPFF) Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod 6 1 l l Page 1
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 7 - Containment Spray Updated: 7/8/96 12:33 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Kendall Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Unavailability: U1 & U2 5168 hrs / yr per train Reliability: $ 2 MPFFs I train per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. PLPC 3. Unplanned ESF Actuatxms less than or equal to 1 each unst for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY: Modes 1,2. 3' (* Pzt. pressure ?.1750 psia) Unit 1 Containment Spray Unavailable Hours 180 00 .- .. . . -... ._ _ _. Limit 168 hrs /yr 140 00 120 00 2 100 00 *. 80 00
~ + - , , _ , , ,
40 00 _ s= r: 20 00 !3 , / 5 TRN
.3 '
L -- 3: : m1B 0 00 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 ~ # 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 I 93 93 tN
---G-.- 1 B t Period tqqqk '
REllABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs-l There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this review penod. Deoradations Q196 OOS Hrs. attnbuted to ECCS suction header leak repair (not a MPFF) PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE
- Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 1: Inadvertent Containment Spray actuation in Aug 95. resulting in 14 days lost availability PLPC 3: 7/96 - Unptanned RAS and CSAS.
Trends / Recent PM Chanoes / Recent industry Ooeratino Eroeriencet No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod,
- SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR I
i SSC: 7 Containment Spray Updated: 7/8/96 12:33 l Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Kendall Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Unava. lability: U1 & U2 5168 hrs / yr per train Rehability. 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months a PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit last 12 months. PLPC 3 Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months.
)
l UNAVAILABillTY Modes 1. 2. 3* (* Pzt oressure 31750 psia Unit 2 Containment Spray Unavailable Hours 180 00 Limit 168 hrs /yr 160 00 140 00 120 00 0 100 00 S 80 00 .A. 60 00 p.g~ " ~
-e-.
1A TRN 40 00 / g - 03 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 03 04 41 02 - +- - 1 A TRN 94 95 95 95 95 OS 96 tetal 93 93 94 94 94 Penod YotF" l P ELt ABILITY List all functional failures Ondicate train for risk sig SSCs), and MPFFs SSC Train , There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system during this review period PLANT LEVEL DERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeoed determine if SSC was cause PLPC 1 <5% PLPC 3. none Iltads I Recent PM Ch4Daes / Recent Industry Operallrigigpgnence. No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review period
~ - -- _
l
. \
l l SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR I SSC: 8 - Main Steam , Updated: 7/8/96 16.51 %;. Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Wolaver Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Reliability; $ 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months l Unavailability: 110 hrs OOS for MSIVs, cumulative for both trains PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unrt, fast 12 months. , PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. l . PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. ' PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unrt for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY-l Unit 1 MSIVs Unavailable Hours j 12.00 Lirnst 10 hrs /yr. e
! 6 00 - A TRN l i*
3 00 - f l; -G--MSIV CBTRNtotal i l 0 00 Q3 04 Q1 Q2 Q3 04 Q1 02 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod l l l REllABILITV' List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system during this review penod 1 l l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a No unplanned automatic reactor tnp PLPC 2b No unplanned manual reactor tnp PLPC 3. Unplanned' ESF Actuation Trends I Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Operatina Experience: ( No adverse or significant trenos were noted during the review penod 4 I J l
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 8 - Main Steam Updated: 7/8/96 18.28 Unit 2 SSC Owner: Wolaver Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Reliability 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months Unavailability: $ 10 hrs OOS for MSIVs cumulative for both trains PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned au+omatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less tr.1 o, equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months, PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY-i Unit 2 MSIVs Unavailable Hours 12 00 , 9 00 - Limit - 10 hrs /yr a j 6 00 M A TRN I ' 3M- '8 TRN
- MSIV total i 0 00 : : : = = = = = = = = = --
]
Q3 04 Q1 02 03 G4 Q1 C2 Q3 04 Q1 C2 ) 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod l 1 R ELI ABILITY- List all functional failures (indicate train for risk sig SSCs), and MPFFs l l No Functional Failures occurred during the review penod Dearadations 2/21/96 - Train B 3/13/96 - TCV-08-1 Went closed blown fuse enanged fuse 5/95 - TC MV-08-12 Did not coen Repairea 8/31/95 - MSR TCVs close due t water intrusion into reheat centrol circuit PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE j Report PLPC If PLPC exceecea deterrnine if SSC was cause l l t PLPC 2a No unplanned automatic reactor trip. PLPC 3 Unpranned ESF Actuation i Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Operati,a Experience: No adverse or significant trencs were note.1 during the review period
. .- . ~- - _. ._ __ _ _ _ _ ~__ _ ___._.____ _ _ _ _. . _ _ - . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
- SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
- SSC
- 9a - Main Feedwater Updated: 7/8/96 13 33 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Green Department: LOF Performance Criteria:
Reliability: $ 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months - Availability: $ 72 hrs OOS for MFIVs. cumulative for MFIVt. PLPC 1. Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a Unplanned automauc reactor inps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY: Unit 1 MFIV Unavailable Hours 75 00 Limit - 72 hrs /yr.
, 50 00 5
$ 25 00 MV-09-07 MV-09-08 0 00 = = = = = = = = = = = = -G- MFIV total 03 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod i
RELIABILITY- List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCra), and MPFFs: 11/16/95 - Reactor tnp due to failure of the 18 Main Feed Regulating b a controller MPFF Dectadations. 9/93 - Downpower due to failed beanng on 18 SGFP. 1/94 - Downpower due to low oil pressure on 1B Main Feed Pump. f PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a: No unplanned automatic reactor inps. PLPC 2b.11/16/95 - Manual Rx Tnp due to 18 MFRV controller failure. PLPC 3. No unplanned ESF Actuations. l i Trends / Recent PM Chances I Recent industry Operat na Excenence: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod.
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 9a - Main Feedwater Updated: 7/8/96 12.51 1 Unit: 2 j SSC Owner: Green i Department: SCE Performance Criteria: R eliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months Availability 5 72 hrs OOS for MFIVs. cumulative for all 4 valves PLPC 1- Unplan,ed unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months PLPC 2b - Unplanr ed manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months FLPC 3 - Unplan..ed ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY Modes t . 2,3* (* uniess 1 MFIV is closed) Unit 2 MFIV Unavailable Hours 75 00 Limit . 72 hrs /yr.
. 50 00 5 CZ::3 HCV-091 A e
I25 00 i
' HCV-09-1B l
_u - ~ 5, 2 e ,5 : I : _ M HCV-09-2A ! C3 C4 Q1 C2 03 04 C1 C2 03 04 C1 C2 HCN2B l 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 MFIV total Period I R ELI ABILITY List all functional failures Oncicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs 2/21/95 - Auto plant ino on low SGWL due to failed level transmitter Dearacations 4/28/94 - HCV-09-2A O-nng blow out. nearly caused unit snutdown 11/16/94 SGFP Faded to start after SNOW due to moisture in leao oox CLANT LEVEL FEPcORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceedec determine if SSC was cause *- LPC 2a No unplanned automatic reactor inns PLPC 2b No unplanned manual reactor trips OLPC 3 No unplanned ESF Actuations Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: No a3 verse or significant trenos were ncted during the review period
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC: 9b - Auxiliary Feedwater Updated: 7/8/96 13 01 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Wolaver i Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Unavailability U1 & U2188 hrs /yr per A&B train. 5168 hrs /yr C train Reliability' g 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months I l PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months i UNAVAILABILITY (as reported to INPO) i 1 I Unit 1 AFW Unavailable Hours 240 00 210 00 ,A*--'- Limit - 168 hrs /yr j 180 00 - .- 1C AFW Train A--4 *
, 150 00 - ,- 1, !
Limit - 88 hrs /yr A&B Tren g,
$ 12000 I A 90 00 - ,4' - g- .A 1 A AFW 60 00 I" -
,__! 1B AFW- ,
30 00 - 0 00 .
] --
-- I C A FW Q3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 C2 c 1A FW 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 l--G-- 1 B AFW.
Penod ! total ,
--* 1Q p , j l
RELIABILITY List a!I functional failures ondicate train for risk sig SSCs). and MPFFs I l 1 C AFW '_ rain I 3/2/93 JV-08-3 wouia not stroke ciosed for tureine relatch torque switch was opening prematurely t MPFC) 7/7/93 Pump control circuit ground on the governor actuator, aging 9/15/94 MV-09-12 would not open MOV blown fuse was not correct size i MPFF) 10/4/94 Pump trip on overspeed. controller has a defective actuator due to corrosion ( MPFF) 8/1/95 MV-09-11 would not open, torque switch contacts dirty. ( MPFF) J l l I PLANT LEVEL PERFORM ANCE l Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause l l Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: j Excess unavaitaulity in 1994 is mostly cv- to on line preventive maintenance INPO SER 4-95. " Terry Turbine Goverr 'codward) Valve Stem Binding"
. SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 9b - Auxiliary Feedwater Updated: 7/8/96 18 29 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Wolaver Department: SCE Performance Criteria:
Unavailability U1 & U2 5 88 hrs /yr per A&B train. 5168 hrs /yr C trarn Reliability- 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months UNAVAILABILITY- (as reported to INPO) Unit 2 AFW Unavailable Hours 250 00 ,a , ,
. . l 200 00 , A A. .
y '*A Limit - 168 hrs /yr e 150 00 - .- 2C AFW Train
= . .A.
) 100 00
~
'A ~
*A- m2A AFW!
3g Limit - 88 hrs /yr A&B Train ,i r
' 2BAFWI 50 00 m ,,,L _ _ _ j p E _.
~
,2 A ._ _
5,,, 5n ] aaa****. 2C AFW 03 04 Q1 02 C3 04 Q1 - C3 04 Q1 02 QFWj 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 is5 95 95 96 96 pw;
+
Period l, , ,, i RELIABILITV ust all functional failures ondicate train for risk sig SSCs), and MPFFs 2C AFW Train - 11/6/95 - MV-09 Broken toraue switch discovered dunng testing 9/20/95 - MV-08-3 tno hook and latching lever had excessive wear. tno of overspeed tnp mech t MPFF) 9/15/95 - Ckt bkr 60903 for MV-06-13 snorted. water intrusion Loss of 1 of 3 trains AFW ( MPFF for sys 50) 6/6/96 - 2C AFW pump tripped on elect overspeed due to water collectior, I Dearaded conditiens leadint to OOS hours 5/17/94 - Througn wall leak on 2C AFW pump B warm-up line due to corrosion 9/15/95 - MV-08-13 would not open on demand Cause identified as rusted PB station 3/13/96 - SE-09-04 failure to open dunng surveillance test. Intermittent keyswitch fault See SCE 96-10 2A AFW Train - 3/1/94 - 2A AFW motor breaker would not close cue to broxen cetter pin ( MPFF for sys 52). oLANT LEVEL PECCORM ANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeced determine if SSC was cause No PLPC exceedance for Unit 2 AFW dunng this monitanng pened Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: Excess unasailacinty in 1994 is mostly aue to on line preventive maintenance l INPO SER 4-95 " Terry Turbne Governor (Woodward) Valve Stem Binding" PCM-96-099 to move piping to alleviate water collection on 2C
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC: 9c ,AFAS Updated: 7/8/96 13:38 Ur.it: 1 SSC Owner: Law & Kirby Department: l&C Performance Criteria: Unavailability: 5 54 hrs /yr for any part of AFAS placing the unit in shutdown LCO. Reliabihty: 5 2 MPFFs / measurement channel type & ESF function per 18 months. PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailabihty less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or eoual to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or eqs.al to each unit for last 12 months. Ub! AVAILABILITY: (OOS hours for any part of AFAS which places the unrt in a shutdown LCO, Modes 13) Unit 1 AFAS Unavailable Hours l 60 00 Limit - 54 hrs /yr. 40 00 g 30 00 WM AFAS-1 20M f = AFAS-2 10 00 0 00 : = = = = = = --G-- Total
= = = = = _
03 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Period RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: Level 11/16/93 - Low S/G Level tnp - during monthly AFAS Test PC card dirty edge connector (J419-C) 9/20/94 - Low S/G Level Trip - dunng mordhly AFAS test. contacts would not make up. DP Lockout 6/18/93 - SG dp tnp - dunng startup. PT-09-10C failed high. ( MPFF) 4/2/94 - SG do tnp - dunng startup, PT-09-100 failed high. ( MPFF) 3/23/96 - SG P.ess. Xmtr PT-09-100. unable to cal. - need to replace. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level performance entena events attnbuted to AFAS Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent in_dustry Ooeratino Exnerience: No aaverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review period { t
[ SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR Updated: 7/8/96 13 38 SSC: 9c AFAS Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Law & Kirby Department: I&C f I Performance Criteria: Unavailabihty: 5 54 hrs /yr for any part of AFAS placing the unit in shutdown LCO. Rehabihty: 5 2 MPFFs / measurement channel type & ESF function per 18 montns. ( PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailabihty less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor inps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITt (OOS hours for any part of AFAS which places the unit in a shutdown LCO. Modes 1-3) Unit 2 AFAS Unavailable Hours
~ *'
60 00 50 00
, 40 00 M AFAS-1 r > AFAS-2 10 00 :
- : : : : : : --+- T otal 0 00 : :
02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 03 04 O1 02 96 95 95 95 95 96 93 94 94 94 94 93 Penod RELI ABILITY List all functional f ailures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: Libf) 3/12/9t SG LevelInd. LT-9013A has sludge intrusion. STAR 2-960232 MPFF DP Lockout 4/3/95 - SG en tnp - dunng monthly AFAS test bistable comparator card would not cause top PLANT LEVEL P RFORMANCE-Report PLPC If P,9C exceeceo determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level perfor, ince cntena events attnbuted to AF AS _ Trends i Recent PM Chances i Recent Industrv Ooeratina Excenencen No adverse or significant trenos were noted dunng the review penod.
SSC PERFORMANCEINDICATOR ' SSC: 10 - Extractum Steam a Updated: 7/5/96 11.S4 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Wolaver Department: SCE Performance Crttaria: PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailabslity less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. ! PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: i4eport PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause i i No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod. FAILURES List all failures, corrective actions .tnd MPFFs: 1 No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review penod. l Trends / Recent PM Changes / Recent Industry Operatina Exoerience: l No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod, l l s i
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 9b - Auxiliary Feedwater Updated: 7/8/96 18 29 Unit: 2 l SSC Owner: Wolaver Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Unavailability U1 & U2 5 88 hrs /yr per A&B train. 5168 hrs /yr C train ! Reliability' 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months ! PLPC 1- Unplanned unavaliability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months l PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 rnonths.
- UNAVAILABIllTY (as reported to INPO) l i
Unit 2 AFW Unavailable Hours l 250 00 a - - - i l i 200 00 ,
'A-I g
A. , ' "A, Lirnet - 168 hrs /yr
. 150 00 *
.- 2C AFW Train 5 .
.k.
100 @ < Lmt 88 hrvyr A&B Train # 'A' ^ A i1 ! 50 00 [ _ _ 20 0 00 - E d -
,[ M_ [
In in _] ECEZIIB2C AFW! l Q3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 0 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Q Ml g l i Penod !
!- dr g y li i
R ELI ABILITY List all functional failures ondicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs 2C AFW Train - 11/6/95 - MV-09 Broken torque switch discovered dunng testing 9/20/95 - MV-08-3 trio hook and latching lever had excessive wear, tnp of overspeed trip mecn ( MPFF) 9/15/95 - Ckt bkr 60903 for MV-08-13 shortea. water intrusion Loss of 1 of 3 trains AFW ( MPFF for sys 50) S/6/96 - 2C AFW pump tnpped on elect overspeed due to water collection i Decraded cendrtions teacina tn OOS hours l 5/17/94 - Througn wall leak on 2C AFW pump B warm-up line due to corrosion l 9/15r95 - MV-08-13 would not open on aemand Cause identified as rusted PB station 3/13/96 - SE-09-04 failure to open duria.g surveillance test. intermittent keyswitch fault See SCE 96-10 l l 2A AFW Train - 3/1/94 - 2A AFW motor breaker would not close cue to bronen cotter pm ( MPFF for sys 52) i OLANT LEVEL PECCORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeoed determine if SSC was cause No PLPC exceedance for Un;t 2 AFW during this monitanng period Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: 1 Excess unavailaoiinty in 1994 is mostly due to on line preventive maintenance INPO SER 4-95 " Terry Turbine Governor (Woodward) Valve Stem Binding" PCM-96-099 to move piping to alleviate water collection on 2C i i
__ _ _ . _ - . ~ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.._ ____ . _ _ - . _. . __. _~. . SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 9c ,AFAS Updated: 7/8/96 13:38 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Law & Kirby Department: I&C Performance Criteria: Unavailability: 5 54 hrrJyr for any part of AFAS placing the unit in shutdown LCO. Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / measurement channel type & ESF function per 18 months. PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a Unplanned automatic reactor inps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manuel reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to ' each unit for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY: (OOS hours for any part of AFAS which places the unit in a shutdown LCO, Modes 1-3) Unit 1 AFAS Unavailable Hours 60 00 Limit 54 hrs /yr.
, 40 00 _
$ 3000 M AFAS-1 '
- 20.00 AFAS-2 10 00 0 00 : : : : : ; = = = = = =
03 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: Level 11/16/93 - Low S/G Level tnp - dunng monthly AFAS Test. PC card dirty edge connector (J419-C) 9/20/94 - Low S/G Level Tnp - dunng monthly AFA$ test, contacts would not make up. DP Lockout 6/18/93 SG dp tnp - dunng startup. PT-09-10C failed high. ( MPFF) 4/2/94 - SG do tnp - dunng startup. PT-09-100 failed high. ( MPFF) 3/23/96 - SG Press. Xmtr PT-09-10D, unable to cal. - need to replace. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeoed determ#ne if SSC was cause No Plant Level performance entena events attnbuted to AFAS Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industrv Operatina Exnerience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod.
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR Updated: 7/8/96 13:38 SSC: 9c- AFAS Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Law & Kirby Department: l&C Egrformance Criteria: Unavailability: 5 54 hrs /yr for any part of AFAS placing the unit in shutdown LCO. Reliability: 12 MPFFs / measurement channel type & ESF function per 18 months. PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or eaual to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a . Unplanned autornatic reactor trips less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY; (OOS hours for any part of AFAS which places the unit in a shutdown LCO. Modes 1-3) Unit 2 AFAS Unavailable Hours 60 00 - Limit - 54 hrs /yr. 50 00 g 40 00 _ _ . . _ _ 8 30 00 M AFAS-1 I 20 00 - AFAS-2 4 00 0 00 : : : : : : -- htM Q3 04 Q1 02 03 04 01 02 03 04 Q1 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod RELIABILITY- List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: LfueJ 3/12/96 - SG Levelind LT 9013A has sludge intrusion STAR 2-960232. MPFF DP Lockout 4/3/95 - SG do Inp dunng monthly AFAS test. bistable comparator card would not cause tno PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level performance critena events a*tobuted to AFAS Trends / Recent PM Changes _/ Recent industry Ooeratina Exoerienen No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod.
~
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 10 - Extraction Steam u Updated: 7/5/96 12:34 "" Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Wolaver , Departrnent: SCE , l Performance Criteria: I PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for thd site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. ;
/i,: !
PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause i No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod 1 FAILURES- List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs: No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review penod. l Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent Industry Operatina Exoerience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod. t l r i
SSC PERFORMANCE INOfCATOR Updated: 7/5/96 12.34 SSC: 10 Extraction Steam Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Wolaver Department: SCE Etrformance Criteria: PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than er equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Levei Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod FAILURES List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs: No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review penod. T l l Trends I Recent PM Chanaes / Recent Industry Ooeratina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod l
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC:11- Heater Drams and Vents Updated: 7/8/96 13.17 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Green Departr at: SCE Performance Criteria: PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less t*an or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 me-PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for lai'. 2 months PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC if PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause Train B 10/95 - 1B Htr Drain Pump tnp resulted in 1 day lost availability FAILURES List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs-3/29/96 - Results of 3yr hist review of failures documented on PMAI #PM96-03-536 Trends i Recent PM Chanaes / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: l No adverse or significant trenos were noted cunng the review penod i l l l l l l i t I
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 11 - Heater Drains and Vents Updated: 7/8/96 13 17 ) Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Green l Department: SCE l Performance Criteria: l PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor inps less than or equal to 1 for the sita for last 12 months l PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor trips less than cr equal to 2 each unrt for last 12 months. i l i ~ 1 l l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause Train A l 3/95 - 2A Htr Drain Pump tnp resurted in 1 day lost availability i l i FAILURES List all failures corrective actions and MPFFs 3/29/96 - Results of 3yr. hist. review of failures documented on PMAI #PM96-03-536. l Deoradation 4/7/93- Downpower for 2A heater drain pump flow switch setpoint. l 2/7/95 - Downpower for 2A heater drain pump motor ground 7/23/95 - Downpower for 2B heater drain pump tnp 8/23/95 - Downpower for 2A heater drain pump trip, due to LCV relay failure Trends / Recent PM Chanaes I Recent industry Operatina Experience: No aaverse or significant trenos were noted during tne review period l l l l l l l
. i
, i SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 12a - Condensate Updated: 7/5/96 12:37 Unit: 1 SSC Owner. Green l Departrnent: SCE Performance critena:
PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailabiltty less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a Unplanned automatic reactor inps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. l 1 l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE 1 Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause : 1 I No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod. l l FAILURES. List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs: 3/29/96 - Results of 3yr hist. review of failures documented on PMAl #PM96-03-531. Trends / Recent PM Changes / Recent industry Ooeratina Exoerience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod.
i SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR ) 7/8/96 14:04 > Updated: SSC: 12a - Condensate Unit: 2 Green SSC Owner: Department: SCE Performance Criteria: PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. ! PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unr! for last 12 montns. l l PLANT LEVEL PERFORM ANCE Report PLPC. If Pl.PC exceeded determine if SSC was cause l 5 Backpressure control problem resulted in 3 days lost availability 5 93,8 93. 9-93,12 93 - Condenser tube leak problems resulted in 5 days lost availability. FAILURES: List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs: 3/29/96 Results of 3yr. hist. review of failures documented on PMAI #PM96-03-531. l Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industrv Ooeratino Exoenence: 1 No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review penod. l l l
i SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 13 Turtune Cooling Water Updated: 7/5/96 12:38 ' Unit: 1 ( SSC Owner: Milton Department: SCE Performance Criteria: PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailabihty less than or equal to 5% for each unrt, last 12 months. PLPC 2a . Unplanned automatic reactor inps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod. FAlLURES- List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs-4/3/96 Results of 3yr. hist. review of failures documented on PMAI #PM96-03-539. Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Ooeratina Experience; No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng tne review penod.
i 1 l 1 SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR I SSC: 13 - Turbine Cooling Water Updated: 7/8/96 17.34 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Milton Department: SCE Performance criteria: PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for eacn unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor trips less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months 1 l l l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE l Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2b - 1/96 Manual reactor inp due to TCV-13-15 causing high gas temp in Main Generator l 6/96 Manual reactor tnp due to TCV-13-15 failure l l l l F AILURES- List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs' 4/3/96 - Results of 3yr. hist. review of failures documented on PMAI #PM96-03-539 1/5/96 - TCV-13-15 Not controlling caused manual reactor tnp. PCM for Hilimrt relay & recalibrated MPFF 6/6/96 - TCV 13-15 failed due to feedback arm uncouptir,g, resulting in manualinp PCM for direct dnve. MPFF Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: An additional failure on TCV-13-15 may result in a(1) classification of that component 6 l I 1 l
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC: 14 - CCW Updated: 7/9/96815 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Milton Department: SCE Performance criteria: Unavadability: U1&U2 5100 hrs /yr per train A, B Reliability: $ 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailabiltty less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. UNAVAILABILITY-1 I Unit 1 CCW Unavailable Hours l
- 120.00 i l 100 00 umit .1oc hrstyr
, 80 00 _ _
i
- - C 1BHDR .
f 20 00 --+- 1 A HDR i
M M 0 00 P _
l -e-- 18 HDR Q3 04 Q1 02 Q3 04 Q1 Q2 03 04 Q1 Q2 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Period RELIABILITY List all functional failures Ondicate train for nsk sig SSCs), anc MPFFs-SSC Train mm/ddlyr - SSC. failure desenption MPFF There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on_this system during this review period. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeoed determine if SSC was cause PLPC 4 None Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: l No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review penod. l l I l 1
l SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC: 14 - CCW Updated: 7/9/96 8-15 Unit: 2 l SSC Owner: Milton l f Department: SCE l Performance Criteria: l j l Unavailability. U1&U2 5100 hrs /yr per train A, 8 l l Reliability 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unrt for last 12 months. PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage UNAVAILABILITY-Unit 2 CCW Unavailable Hours 120 00 100 00 urnit - 100 hrstyr 80 00 f 3 60 00 j'
$ 40 00 /
'2A HDR i j j
20 00 ": - - I U . 2A HOR 0 00 . : Q3 04 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 04 Q1 Q2 -#-2B HDR 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Period RE LI ABILITY- List all functional failures Ondicate train for risk sig SSCs), and MPFFs SSC Train mm/ddlyr - SSC. failure desenption. MPFF There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng tnis review penod PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 4 None Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Operatina Experience: Excess unavailability in 1994 is mostly due to on line preventive maintenance No adverse or significant trenos were noted dunng the review period l l i ! i l l
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 17a - Turbine Lube Oil Updated: 7/8/96 13.22 Unit: 1 r SSC Owner: Wolaver Department: SCE Performance Criteria: PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a Unplanned automatic reactor inps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. ' PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 montns. ! l I RELI ABILITY List all functional f ailures (indicate train for risk sm RSCs) and MPFFs There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system during this review period. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause . l 4 l l l l Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatino Experience:. No aaverse or significant trends were noted curing the review pertoa.
. SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR Updated: 7/8/96 13.22 SSC: 17a - Turbine Lube Oil Unit 2 SSC Owner: Wolaver Department: SCE Performance Criteria: PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for eacn unit. last 12 months PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor trips less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months PLPC 2b - Unplatined manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. R ELI ABILITY List all funct:onal failures undicate train for risk sig SSCs). and MPFFs There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failt.res on this system during this review period PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeced determine if SSC was cause Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: No aoverse or significant trends were noted during the review period E
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 17b - EDG Fuel Oil Updated: 7/8/96 '3:11 i Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Kulavich Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Unavailability: U1 & U2 5120 hrs / yr per train A. B Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months. PLPC 3 Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 4 Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. UNAVAILABILITY. Unit 1 EDG Fuel Oil Transfer Pump Unavailable Hours 120 00 imit 120 hrs /yr
,, 80 00 5 1 A PP S 40 00 Q 1BPP
. . _ _ --+-- 1 A PP 0 00 - - - - - - - -
-e-- 1B PP Q3 04 Q1 02 Q3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02
^~'
93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod RELIABILITY' List all functional fa sures (indicate train for risk sig SSCs). corrective actions and MPFFs: There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this review penod. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 3 51 PLPC 4 0 Irrends / Recent PM Changes / Recent indu_3_trv Ooeratina Expfriga.ct;. No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review pened
. l I
i
- 1 SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATQB l SSC: 17b - EDG Fuel Oil Upda!ed: 7/8/96 13:11 Unit. 2 1 SSC Owner Au!avich i Performance Criteria:
Unavailability: U1 & U2 5120 hrs / yr per train A, B Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months. l PLPC 3 Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. j PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA during less than 1 each outage. l 1 UNAVAILABILITY: l l Unit 2 EDG Fuel Oil Transfer Pump Unavailable Hours : 120 00 timit 120 hrstyr. )
, 80 00 E
o 2A PP I 40 00 Q2B PP O 00 = = = = = = e'hh N + 2BPP' 03 C4 01 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 01 02 93 93 94 94 94 44 95 95 95 95 96 96 Period RELIABILITY List all functonal failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: (attach supporting documents as applicable, e g. CRs, ADM 17.08 Figs, etc.) There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system during this review period. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE j Repert PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine rf SSC was cause l l PLPC 3. 11 PLPC 4. 0 I_rgpfs / Recent PM Changes / Recent industry Ooeratino Exoerience: 6 No acverse or significant trenas were noted dunng the review penod l l
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR Updated: 7/9/96 14:59 SSC: 18b - Instrument Air Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Kendall Department: SCE Egrformance Criteria:_ Reliability: < 2 MPFFs / Compressor A. B. C, D and cross tie valve per 18 months. PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY Unit 1 instrument Air Unavailable Hours 640 00 560 00 480 00 _a _
~-
400 00 Lirnit - 336 hrs /yr
' * ' ~ ~q #,.*, \
320 00 I 240 00 -
'. * '~
- M 1C CMP 160 00 ,s
-m M 1D CMP i , . -
- 7f__ _
03 04 01 Q2 03 04 Q1 02 1C CMP 03 04 Q1 C2 was 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 % 96
--G-- 1 D CMP totai Penod RElfABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs) and MPFFs:
Jun 19961 A will not load due to solenoid valve (1soll) bad (MPFF) l Aug 19941C breaker tnpped. breaker was replaced. Breaker failure will be included in 480 VAC.(MPFF) l Apr 19951C breaker inpried. bkr setting was found on the high setting Breaker failure will be included in 480 VAC.(MPFF) Feb 19951C breaker tnpped. breaker was checked and no problems found. ! Dec 19931C motor does not run. found blown fuse and bad control transformer; replaced control transformer. l l DEGRADED CONDITIONS l Mar 19961C water in the oil, change oil and oil filter. Feb 19961D replaced cracked cooling hose. Mar 19951D fix water jacket leak Apr 19941C water in the oil due to trap SM-18-14 not draining properly. l Mar 19941C water in the oil due to intercooler drain obstruction. l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE._ l Report PLPC If PLPC exceeoed determine if SSC was cause l PLPC 2b: No unplanned manual reactor inp. PLPC 4: No unplanned " red" SSA dunng outages. l 1
* ' SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR Updated: 7/9/96 14:57 SSC: 18b - Instrument Air Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Kendall Department: SCE Performance Criteria:-
Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / Compressor A, B, C, D and cross tie valve per 18 months. PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY- ' Unit 2 Instrument Air Unavailable Hours I 640 00 560.00 F~,,__ \ 480 00 'g 400 00 / ~ l E ~ ~~ ~' g 320 00 / -
' I Z 240 00 _ _ - ,
160 00 \ _,.4.,..* 2C CMP ' i 80 00 - __.g
. ; ' N -
~
= 'l l N E - E 0.00 7 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Ot 02 03 04 Ot O2 - +- 2C CMP mai 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 %
---G--2DMagMP Period R ELI ABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs:
l Jan 1993 2A soleniod valve for instrument compressor valve failed.(MPFF) Feb 1993 2A pistons in the unloader were frozen, replaced 3 unloader assemblies and all 4 suction valves.(MPFF) l i DEGRADED CONDITIONS., Feb 1994 2A suction valve unloader stuck in the open position. Dec 1995 2C water in the oil system, changed oil and oil filter. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE. Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause l PLPC 2a: No unplanned automatic reactor tnp. l PLPC 2b: No unplanned manual reactor tnp. PLPC 4: No unplanned " red
- SSA dunng outages l
Trends / Regg.nt PM Chances / Recent industry Ooeratina Exoenence: No adverse or significant trenos were noted dunng the review penod. l l
d SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 19 - Condensate Pohshing Updated: 7/5/96 12:45 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Green Department: SCE Performance Criteria.;. PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailabihty less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a Unplanned automatic reactor inps less than or equal to i for the site for last 12 months.' ! PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. l l l i l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod. FAILURES List all functional failures, corrective actions and MPFFs: No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review penod. I Trends I Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Operatina Expenence. No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod. i
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 1 SSC: 19 - Condensate Polishh19 Updated: 7/5/96 12.45 l Unit: 2 i l SSC Owner: Green Department: SCE Eer19anar1::e criteria: PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. i PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. ' PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor trips less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause i No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod 1 1 4 FAILURES; List all functional failures. corrective actions and MPFFs-No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review penod. l Trends / Recent PM Changes / Recent Industry Ooeratina Experience: 1 No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod. l 6 1
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
- SSC
- 21a - ICW Updated: 7/8/96 13.34 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Milton Department: SCE Performance Criteria-Unavailability: U1&U2 5100 hrs / yr per train A, B Reliability: $ 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned :navailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months.
PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA during less than i each outage. UNAVAILABillTY i Unit 1 ICW Unavailable Hours 120 00
, Limit - 100 hrs /yr 100 00 ,.
g 80 00
@ 60 00 - .'
e..e' , s
- c
_ _ - _"N 40.00 - - g- g,,4,.+-* 1 A HDR. . MM- / g I! _- as E E 1B HDRI 0 00 - - - - . _ 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 - +- - 1 A HDRi 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 ; Penod --G--- 1 B HD R, REllABILITY List all functional failures lindicate train for nsk sig SSCs). and MPFFs SSC Train mm/ddlyr - SSC, failure description, MPFF Train A 3/30/93- TIC-14-4A Control air line broke, replaced line 6/30/93 - TIC-14 4A Auto function failed, recalibrated 7/25/95- TIC-14-4A Temperature compensat:on function failed. replaced Train 8 - 4/5/93- HCV-14-38 Control air leak. repaired Degradation 4/23/96 - l SO-21-5A founo not insta!!ec.1 A- ICW pump plaaced out of service (CR 96-554) PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC: 4 None Trends / Recent PM Chanoes / Recent industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review pened. Excess unavailability in 1994 is mostly due to on line preventive maintenance
. SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 21a - ICW Updated: 7/8/96 13 34 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Milton Department: SCE Performance Criteria:
Unavailability' U1&U2 $100 hrs / yr per train A. B Reliability: $ 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each untt, last 12 months PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA during less than 1 each outage UNAVAILABILITV Unit 2 ICW Unavailable Ho's 120 00 Lirnd - 100 hrs /yr 100 00 80 00 m i l 60 00 l 40 00 2A HD1 l l 20 00 _A -
,o
' M 2BHDRi l l
0 00 _
* ~ ~
- mis - .
;;~ _
.- M '
i t
- M HDRI C3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 Q3 C4 C1 C2 total l
93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96
--5-- g DR
( Pe1od I l R EU ABILITY List all functional failures (indicate tras". for risk sig SSCs) and MPFFs SSC Train There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventacle Funct:enal Failures on this system during this review period PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 4 None l Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatino Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review persoo
, _. - - - . - - . . _ _ . - .. - . - - _ . ~ . _ . _ - - . . - - .. . . - _ . - - . . - l t i l ' SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR i I ! SSC: 21b - Circulating Water Updated: 7/5/96 13:06 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Smst Department: SCE Performance Criteria: PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor inps less than or equal to 1 for the srte for last 12 months. PLPC 2b Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: ( Report PLPC. If FLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review period. l 1 FAILURES: List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs: l No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review penod. l l Trends / Recent PM Chanoes I Recent Industry Operatina Experienet No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod. l l l I l l P Pi I j i A f
I l SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC: 21b - Circulating Water Updated: 7/8/96 13 46 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Smrt Department: SCE Performance Criteria: PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. I PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months I PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review pened FAILURES List all failures. corrective actions and MPFFs No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review penod Dearadation 9/11/93 - Downpower due to 2B1 travehng screen failure chain roller 9/29/93 - Downpower due to loss of all screen wash capability 3/5/96 - Downpower to repair water bcx discharge tnrough wall leaks Trends I Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience-No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review period I 1 l 6l
_ - - - - - - . - . _ . _ . - - - --- . . - . ~ . - -. . . - - - - . - . _ - . - - - . - . . - k Q,SC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 22 - Turbine Updated. 7/8/96 14:28 _ ;. ! Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Wolaver Department: SCE , Performance Criteria: PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or er'ual to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. i PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the srte for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod. b M URES List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs 4/3/96 - Results of 3yr. hist. review of failures documented on PMAI #PM96-03-538 No MPFFs Dearadation 2/23/94 - Turbine oeanng found darnaged at start of refueling 6/10/05 - Downpower because governor valve #1 LVDT failure, due to loose connection 5/23/94 - 2B Reheat & Intercept valves failed to reopen due to EH particulate 2/21/96 - Downpower on closure of all 4 MSR reheat valves. 5/31/96 - Downpower on closure of alt 4 MSR reheat valves, due to moisture intrusion. Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review pened i t t
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR Updated: 7/8/96 14:12 -- SSC: 22 - Turbine Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Wolaver Department: SCE Performance Criteria: PL PC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor trips less than or equal to 1 for the srte for last 12 months PLPC 20 - Unplanned manual reactor trips less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determ:ne if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cnteria exceeded due to this SSC during the review period. FAILURES List all failures. corrective actions and MPFFs l 4/3/96 - Results of 3yr hist. review of failures documented on FMAI #PM96-03-538 No MPFFs Dearadation 4/12/95 - Downpower for DEH system power supply resistor failure i Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent Industry Operatina Experience-I l No aoverse or significant trends were noted during the review ps..r d 6
^
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR / SSC: 23a - SGBD Rad Monttonng' Unit: 1 Updated: 7/8/96 14:30 SSC Owner: Gusmano Department: I&C Performance Criteria: Reliability: < 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 5 - Unplanned., reportable radiological release less than or equal to 1 from the srte dunng the last 12 month REllABILITY' List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs-SSC Train mm/ddlyr - SSC, failure desenption. MPFF There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures Trends 1 Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review period
1 i SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC: 22 - Turbine Updated: 7/8/96 14:12 . Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Wolaver Department: SCE Performance Criteria: PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unrt, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months PLPC 2b Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Critena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod. FAILURES List all failures. ccrrective actions and MPFFs 4/3/96 - Results of 3yr hist review of failures documented on PMAI #PM96-03-538 No MPFFs Qearadat e 4/12/95 - Downpower for DEH system power supply resistor failure Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: l l No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review period ) 6 l
c SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 23a - SGBD Red Monttonng-- Updated: 7/8/96 14:30 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Gusmano Department: I&C Performance Criteria: Reliebility. < 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 5 - Unplanned, reportable radiological release less than or equal to 1 from the site during the last 12 months. RELIABILITY: List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs: SSC Train mm/dd/yr - SSC, failure desenstion. MPFF There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures Trends / Recent PM Chanaes i Recent Industry Operatina Experience: No aoverse or significant trends were noted during the review period l l l l
l l s SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC: 23a - SGBD Rad Monitonng Updated: 7/8/96 14.30 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Gusmano Department: I&C Performance Criteria: Reliability: $ 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 5 - Unplanned, reportable radiological release less than or equal to 1 from the site dunng the last 12 months. l RELIABILIN List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs: l l SSC Train I mm/ddlyr - SSC, failure desenption, MPFF l There were ne Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures l Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review penod I 1 i l l l l 6 l
I o SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 25a - HVAC-Risk Significant (page 1 of 2) Updated: 7/8/96 15:14 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Mendoza Department: SCE Performance Criterig.;_ PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less th2n or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. HVE.9A/B Unavadabikty: U1 & U2 5168 hrs / yr for each train: A. B Reliabikty: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months HVS-SA/B Unavadabihty: U1 & U2 5168 hrs / yr for each train: A, B Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months HVS-4A/B Unavailability: Ut & U2 5168 hrs / yr for each train: A. B Reliabibty: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months HVS-1 A/B/C/D Unavailabihty: U1 & U2 5168 hrs / yr for each train: A. B Reliabihty: 5 2 MPFFs / electrical train A. B per 18 months UNAVAILABILITY 180 00 Unit i HVE 9A/98 Unavailable Hours
~ ~ - ' ~
e 120 00 HVE 9A
$ 60 00
, CC HVE-98 0 00 = 2 2 T #l' ^
- HVE-9A Q3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 -S- HVE-90 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Period am. _ _ . _ _ ---_ __ - . = _ _ _ - - - -
,gg gg Unit i HVS-SA/58 Unavailable Hours
.imit 168 hrs /yr.
e120 00 5 C-""3 HVS-SA z 60 00 CC HVS-5B 0 00 : = = = = = = = = = =
-+-- HVS-SA Q3 04 01 02 C3 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 - G-- HVS-5 B Period M0 00 Unit 1 HVS 4A148 Unavailable Hours 480 00 E C"""3 HVS-4A 3 320 00
-4 B 160 00 _ _ _
0 00 i C L - l - 0 -+- HVS-4A Q3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 Q3 04 Q1 02 --G-- HVS-4B 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod
- . - - - . - - . ~ .
180 00 Unit i HVS-1 AI1Bl1C/10 Unavailable Hours WIINE HVS-1 A
~ ~
umit 168 hrs /yr ~ CIM*lHVS 1B C 120.00 m iiv'i 1C a Mc ID
= 60 00
-+-- HVS-1 A 0 00 --< 0 ;M -
-N Of ~
Q3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 Q4 Q1 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 9$ 95 95 95 96 96 -*- HVS-1 C Period HVS1D ! l l 1 l
I f l 1 SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l
- SSC
- 25a - HVAC-Risk Significant (page 1 of 2) Updated: 7/8/96 15:16 I Unit: 2 1
SSC Owner: Mendoza Department: SCE l Performance Criterin PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. l HVE-9A/B Unavailability: U1 & U2 5168 hrs / yr for each train: A, B Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months HVS-SA/B Unavailability: U1 & U2 5168 hrs / yr for each train: A. B Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months HVS-4A/B Unavailability: U1 & U2 5168 hrs / yr fo, eacn train: A, B l Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months l HVS 1 A/B/C/D Unavailability: U1 & U2 5168 hrs / yr for each train A, B Reliability: $ 2 MPFFs / electncal train A. B per 18 months l l UNAVAILABILITY-180 00 Unit 2 HVE-9A/98 Unavailable Hours
, Limit 168 hrs /yr c 120.00 a
I - -- l C""" -]HVE-9A
$ 60 00 _
_ p-4 I [ i _w _ CC HVE-98 0 00 - -- ~ -
-+-- HVE 9A 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 01 02 -G-- HVE 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod
. - - - . . . = = - - - - - . _ - -._ =------,---:---=------------
Unit 2 HVS-5A/SB Unavailable Hours 180.00 Limit 168 hrs /yr. e,120 00 - i HVS-5A -
$ 60 00 C""=3 HVS-5B 0 00 = = = = = = = = = = = = --+-- HVS-SA 03 04 C1 02 C3 04 Q1 02 03 C4 01 02 --G-- HVS 5B 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96
' ~ ' - ~ ~
Penod a.,----=:=-____.===:_-_m__.__._... . . _ _
._..__..r-----=mm .--,_--: .
640 00 Unit 2 HVS-4A/4B Unavailable Hours
, Limit - 625 hrs /yr.
480 00 l -_
'---,i HVS-4A -
3_000 "lll s 03 04
; e 02
%y C3 04 01 3
02 03 4 J -."T" 04 -G-- HVS-4 8 Q1 Q1 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod
.- -mm_------- __ w._ m---.m.=.-- -
180.00 Unit 2 HVS-1 A/18/1C/1D Unavailable Hours Eggmu MVS-1 A
~
Limit 168 nrs>yr CZEE HVS-1 B 120 00 g musus HvS-1c ! $ 60 00 i _ HVS-10 0 00 e' _ _ _ ', I b ' -G- HVS 1B C3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 Q4 01 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 --*-- HVS 1 C Penod HVS-1D
1 l SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 25a - HVAC-Risk Significant (page 2 of 2) Updated: 7/8/96 15:14 l Unit: 1 l SSC Owner: Mendoza Department: SCE RELIABILITY: List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: SSC Trains Containment 11/15195- HVS -1C Would not start, breaker bad, repasred breaker. (MPFF for sys 47) RAB Batterv Rooms 11/26/95- RV -1 Fan tnp - motor brg. failed. replaced brg. (MPFF) 12/30/95- RV -3 Fan would not start after belt channge, closed local disconnect. (MPFF) RAB Main Ventilation 5/16/95- HVS-4B would not start, breaker bad, breaker replaced. (MPFF for Sys 47) Dectaded conditions: ECCS Train A 2/26/95 - HVE 9A. D - 2 Damper nmotor failed, replaced motor, adj. linkage. 5/9/95 - HVE-9A, D - 1 Damper motor failed, replaced motor, adj. finkage. 6/14/95 - HVE.9A, D 14 Damper motor failed, replaced motor, adj. linkage.
, ECCS Train B 12/28/93- HVS-98, D 118 - Damper motor bound up, cleaned & adj. linkage.
10/24/95 HVE 98, D-98 Damper motor failed, replaced motor, adj. linkage. Control room 3/11/94 - ACC - 3A Damper linkage binding, adj. linkage. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCfa, Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause Trends / Recent PM Channes / Recent industry Operatina Exoerieneet No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review penod.
i 1 SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC:25a- HVAC-Rrsk Signrficant (page 2 of 2) Updated: 7/8/96 15:16 l Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Mendoza Department: SCE REllABILITY: List all functicnal failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: ! SSC Trains Shield buildina. Train A 7/25/95- HVE 6A, Faulty relay, replaced relay. Shield buildina Train B 1/5/94 - HVE-68. Damper D-24 faulty flow switch, overhauled damper. (MPFF) Containment 2/25/95- HVS-1D Stopped. cannot restart, bad relay, replaced relay. 11/17/95- HVS-1 A Did not start, bad relay, replaced relay. B.h2 4/6/96 - HVS-4A inboard motor beanng failed (MPFF) ELANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause l l l Ifends / Rec.gnt PM Channes / Recent industry Oceg_ tina Exoerience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod. 1 1 E l
. . . - . --_ _ - --. . . . . - . - . . . . - . . . . _ _.-- - _ . . - - ~ _ . - . - . . . . . - - - . _ . . _ _ .
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR i SSC: 25b - HVAC - Non Risk Updated: 7/8/96 15.16 : ,, Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Mendoza Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Reliability: $ 2 MPFFs / train for H2 Purge and Shield Bldg fans. per 18 months. PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unrt last 12 months PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs-There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this review pened I PLANT LEVEL PERFORM ANCE: Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded cetermine if SSC was cause None Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the revtew period
. l l
I J SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR j l SSC: 25b - HVAC - Non Risk Updated: 7/8/96 16.28 l l Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Mendoza Department: SCE l Performance criteria: 1 Reliability 5 2 MPFFs / train for H2 Purge and Shield Bldg fans, per 18 months. PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. j PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months , l PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unrt for last 12 months. J l j j REllABILITY: List all functional failures (Indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: 7/24/95 - CEDM HVE-21 A failed due to beanng vieration (MPFF) l l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: 1 Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded oetenr.ine if SSC was cause None l Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: Preventative Maintenance added CEDM fans to monitoring program. I No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review penod i l 1 l l l l 6 1
.- - -- . ._- - . . - . . . . . - _ . - . . . - . . . - - , - ._.-. - ..--- ~
i SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 25n - ECCS Drains Updated: 7/8/96 16.56 t! nit: 1 SSC Owner: Kendall Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Reliability: 12 MPFFs / functional monitonng area, per 18 months PLPC 5 - Unplanned, reportable radiological release less than or equal to 1 from the site during the last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cnteria exceeded due to this SSC during the review period. FAILURES' List all failures, correctrve actions and MPFFs No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review period Dearadations 8/10/95 - Flooding of pipe pen room, shutdoen cooling safety valve lifted (MPFF) Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review period. l
)
l l l
l SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 25n . ECCS Drains Updated: 7/9/G6 7.40 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Kendall I Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Reliabihty- 5 2 MPFFs / functional monrtonng area. per 18 months PLPC 5 - Unplanned, reportable radiological release less than or equal to 1 from the srte during the last 12 months. l PLAN
- LEVEL PERFORMANCE: Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cr;tena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod FAfLURES' List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs-No functional failures or MPFFs were identified during the review period.
1 l l 1 I I Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: i No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review penod l 6
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC:26- Radiation Monitonng Updated: 7/9/96843 Unit: 1 SSC Owr er: Gusmano Department: I&C Performance Criteria: Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / functional rnonstonng area per 18 months . PLPC 3 Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 5 Unplanned, reportable radiological release less tren or equal to 1 from the site durang the last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE. Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause EA1 LURES: Containment Radiation Monitors 10/18/93 - RSC-26-1 Noble gas monitor failed low. repaired. (MPFF) 1/6/95- RE-26-31 Containment air monitor failed, rebuilt pump. (MPFF) 9/15/94 - RIS-26-59 intermittent operational failure, changed module Reactor Aux Buildino Aadiation Monitors 7/25/95 RSC-26-2 Battery charger will not charge, repaired. 8/7/95- RIS 26-10-2 Removed & replaced CH10. (MPFF) 8/17/95- FCV-26-2 Ground on bus., water in junction box repaired , ; 10/25/95 - CT-2 Noble gas software failed, reprogrammed. (MPFF) , 5/11/96 - RE-26-57 failed (PMAI 96-06-184 to investigate) l CCW Skid 5/4/96 - Ebertine Rad Monitor Console loss indication, due to battery failure (MPFF). Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industrv Operatina Experience: t p No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod. l s 1 WW e) n
= .-. - - -
l l . l l SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 26 - Radiation Monitonng Updated: 7/8/96 14 42 Unit: 2 l l SSC Owner: Gusmano Department: I&C Performance Criteria: Reliacility 5 2 MPFFs / functional monttonng area per 18 months PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. ' PLPC 5 - Unplanned, reportable radiological release loss than or equal to 1 from the site during the last 12 months l l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 3 Occurrences two total, one in 1993. and one in 1994, see the rest of report. PLPC 5 0ccurrence. "NONE" FAILURES: Containment Radiation Monitors 12/8/93 - RE-26-25A Monitor test failed calibrated (MPFF) i 3/29/94 - RIM-26-3 Faulty reading bad detector. replaced cetector. 11/22/94 - RC-26-41 Module failed reboot .can not find problem 1 2/22/95 - RE-26-25A Monitor not functional, checked cata base. no problem fo'Jnd l 5/15/95 - RC-26-25 Monitor failed. downloaded put into service 6/6/95 - RC-26-41 Operating light out. adjusted R-15 bal pot- (MPFF) j 1/19/96 - RC-26-25 Locked out/ no indication, rebooted l l l Control Room Radration Monitors 6/27/94 - RC-26-62 Alarming 24 hrs . adjusted setpoint l!/PG) 10/31/94 - RC-26-61 Monitor failed. cleaned contacts 6/14/95 - RC-26-62 Failed low repaired controller 12/8/95 - RE 26-62A Beta reading high. calibrated (MPFF) 12/19/95 - RC-26-62 RM-23 Failed can not fino problem Reactor Aux Buildina Radiation Monrtors 5/11/94 - RM-23 Switch fauity. repaired 1/24/94 - RC-26-70 High alarm, installed new power supply (MPFF) 12/6/95 - FCV-26-1 Slow stroke. adjusted air regulator. (MPFF) 4/15/96 - RM-26-14 Sample pump squeaking l Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Operatina Experience: Reliability issues related to inacequate PM i i t
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC:27a- Hydrogen Analyzer Updated: 7/8/96 18:03 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Kirby & Schmid Department: I&C Performance Criteria: Reliability: 5,2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailabilrty less than or equal to 5% for each untt, last 12 months. , PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Report PLPC.. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review period. FAILURES List all failures. corrective actions and MPFFs-5/12/96 - A.iB Hydrogen analyzer failed, due to excessive moisture in sample line (MPFF) 5/20/96 - E aalizer valves on FSE-27-9 &FSE-27-15 failed 3/25/96 - Results of 3yr. hist review of failures documented on PMAl #PM96-03-542. No MPFFs l Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Experience: j No aoverse or signi ficant trends were noted dunng the review period
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR Updated: 7/10/96 7:47 SSC: 27a - Hydrogen Analyzer Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Kirby & Schmid Department l&C Performance Criterial Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. fast 12 months _ r PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE:_ Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod. FAILURES: List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs. No MPFFs 3/25/96 - Results of 3yr. hist. review of failures documented on PMAl #PM96-03-542. Trends I Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Ooeratina Exoerience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod.
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATQR
- SSC: 27b - Hydrogen Recombiners .
Unit: 1 - Updated: 7/8/96 14:43 ,1, SSC Owner: Wachtel Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Reliabihty: < 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1-Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each untt, last 12 months PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod. FAILURES List all failures. corrective actions and MPFFs 4/12/96 - Results of 3yr hist review of failures documented on PMAI #PM96-03-535 No MPFFs Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Oortattna Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod.
l SSC PERFORMANCE IND!CATOR SSC:27a- Hydrogen Analyzer Updated: 7/10/96 7:47 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Kirby & Schmid Department: I&C Egrformance Criteria: Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months I PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE' Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod. FAILURES: List all failures. corrective actions and MPFFs. 3/25/96 - Results of 3yr. hist. review of failures documented on PMAI #PM96-03-542. No MPFFs Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent Industry Ooeratina Excenence. No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod. I 1
__ _. . _. . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ ._ - _._ __ _ . _ ____ , . _ . . _ . _ - . _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ ~ _ e SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 27b - Hydrogen Recombiners .- Updated: 7/8/96 14:43 a . ,. Unit: 1 ' SSC Owner: Wachtel Department: SCE
,i Performance Criteria:
Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 1a months PLPC 1- Unrianned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. l I ? j PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause i l i l No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC during the review penod-f 1 FAILURES List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs 4/12/96 Results of 3yr hist. review of failures documented on PMAI #PM96-03-535 No MPFFs l l t Trends i Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review pened l 1 l
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 27b - Hydrogen Recombiners Updated: 7/8/96 14:43 _, Unit: 2
- SSC Owner: Wachtel Department: SCE Performance Criteria:
Reliability. < 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailabilsty less than or equal to 5% for een unit, last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review period FAILURES List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs e 4/12/96 - Results of 3yr. hist review of failures documented on PMAI #PM96-03-535 No MPFFs l l Trends I Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: l No adverse or significant trenos were noted dunng the review penod l 6 l l
o SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 37 - Ultimate Heat Sink Valves Updated: 7/8/96 14.47 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Sciscente Department: OST Performance criteria: Reliability: 12 MPFFs / train per 18 months PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailabihty less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. RELIABILITY' List all functional failures (indicate train for risk sig SSCs), and MPFFs' - No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review pened PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Critena exceeded due to this SSC during the review pened
. Trends i Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatina ENDerience:
No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review period
9 SSC FERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC: 37 - Ultimate Heat Sink Valves Updated: 7/8/96 14.47 l Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Sciscente Department: OST Performance Criteria: Reliability- 12 MPFFs / train per 18 months l PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each untt, last 12 months RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs). and MPFFs: No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review penod. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod. Trends / Recent PM Chancies / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trenas were noted dunng the review penod.
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 46- 6.9 kv swgr & bkrs Updated: 7/5/96 13 09 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Campbell Department: SCE P_erformance criteria: PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unolanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to t for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod. FAILURES' List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs: No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review penod. Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Ooeratina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod.
l SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 46 - 6.9 kv swgr & bkrs Updated: 7/5/96 13:09 I Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Campbell Department: SCE i Performange Criteria: l PLPC 1- Ur: panned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. l PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the stte for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review penod. FAILURES List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs: No functional failures or MPFFs were identified dunng the review penod. l Trends / Recent PM Changes / Recent industry Ootratina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review period. , 1 6i. l t l
a SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 47a - 480 VAC swgr & bkrs Updated: 7/8/96 17.37 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Campbell Department: SCE Performance criteria: Reliability' < 2 MPFFs / train A. B or AB for vital switchgear only, per 18 months. Unavailability: Trended by the systems supported by 480 VAC PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor trips less than or equal to i for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), ar;d MPFFs 480V 182 11/15/95 HVS -1C Would not start. breaker bad. repaired breaker. (from sys 25a)(MPFF) 480V 195 5/16/95 HVS-4B tnpped while starting fan. breaker replaced (from sys 25a)(MPFF) PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceecea determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a No unplanned automatic reactor trip PLPC 2b No unplanned manual reactor trip PLPC 3 No unplanned ESF Actuations PLPC 4 No unplanned " Red" SSA during outages Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: A potential part 21 was identified in CR96-1334
i i i SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 47a 480 VAC swgr & bkrs Updated: 7/8/96 14:50 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Campbell Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Reliabliity: 5 2 MPFFs / train A. B or AB for vital switchgear only, per 18 months. Unavailability. Trended by the systems supported by 480 VAC PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months l PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months-PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual resctor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs-12/31/95- Ckt breaker 2-40508 for 2B Charging pp tnps freq. Cottor pin mising, prevents reset. (MPFF) PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a No unplanned automatic reactor tnp PLPC 2b No unplanned manual reactor tnp PLPC 3 No unplanned ESF Actuat,ons PLPC 4 No unplanned " Red" SSA dunng outages 6 Trends / Recer' ' M Chances / Recent Industry Operatina Experitiece: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod l
. . . . - . . .-. . _ - . . -- - -. ~. - - . . - - ._ .
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 47B - 480 VAC swgr & bkrs Unit: 1 Updated: 7/9/96 15:16 ~[ l SSC Owner: Campbell l Department: SCE Performance Criteria. Reliabilrty: 5 2 MPFFs / train A,8 or AB for vital switchgear only, per 18 months. PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailabi!ity less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. REllABILITY: List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: P
- Aug 19941C instrument air compressor breaker tripped, brea'ter was replaced. (MPFF)
Apr 19951C instrument air compressor motor breaker tnop(;d, bkr setting was found on the high setting (MPFF) l l l l l l l l PLANT L EVEL PERFORMANCE;. Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause j PLPC 2a: No unplanned automatic reactor tnp. l PLPC 2b: No unplanned manual reactor tnp PLPC 4; .No unplanned " Red" SSA dunng outages I l l Trends / Recent PM Change.s / Recent Industrv Oneratina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review penod. 1 l l l
33C PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 478 480 VAC swgr & bkrs Updated: 7/8/96 14:52 - Unit: 2 l SSC Owner: Campbell Department: SCE Performance Criteria:_ Reliability- < 2 MPFF5 / train A. B or AB for vital switengear oniy, pe: 18 months. PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage R ELI ABILITY- List all functi onal failures (indicate train for risk sig SSCs), and MPFFs: Degradations: 3/25/94 Ckt breaker 2-40212 for MG set 2A closing rnen racked in Replaced bkr. (PMT failure) PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a No unplanned automatic reactor trip PLPC 2b No unplanned manual reactor trip PLPC 4 No unplanned " Red" SSA during outages Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent Industry Operatina Expersence: No adverse or significar't trends were noted duririg the review period I i
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC: 48 - 120/208 vac Updated: 7/8/96 14:54 i Unit 1 SSC Owner: Campbell Department: SCE Performance Criteria: PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor inps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months-PLPC 7b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. RELIABILITY' List all functional fadures Ondicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs' There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system during this review penod 4 , PLANT LEVEL PERPORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatina Expenence: No adverse or s6gnificant trends were noted dunng the review pened i s 4 9
} } }
1 i 1 i 4 1
- - ,m . . , , , --.-e
. SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 48 - 120/208 vac Updated: 7/8/96 14.54 Unit 2 SSC Owner: Campbell Department: SCE Performance Criteria:
PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor trips less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for risk sig SSCs), and MPFFs-There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system during this review period PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review period. l 6 l l
. .- - - ~ - - . _ - _ _ _ _ - .- - - - --. . -. . .- -. . . _ . - - SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 49- 120 Vit::l VAC inverters Updated: 7/8/96 14 58 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Dean Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Reliability. 5 2 MPFFs / train for safety related inverters only, per 18 months Unavailability: $ 8 hrs / yr OOS combined total for instrument buses PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unrt, last 12 months PLPC 2a Unplanned automatic reactor trips less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months PLPC 2b Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 4 Unplanned ' Red" SSA during less than 1 each outage. UNAVAILABILITY Unit i 120 VAC Instrument Bus Unavailable Hours [ 10 00 8 00 Limit 8 hrs /yr. 2 6 00 5
- c 4 00 - 'CCMA Bus i 2 00 _ _ _ _ MB Bus i 0 00
~ ~
N : : : : : : MC Busi 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02
- MD Busi 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96
'i' Total Period i RELI ABILITY' List all functional failures Oncicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs:
8/21/93 - 2C Instrument inverter failed due to filter eaoaestors 11/4/94- Failure of the B instrument inverter while CIS Ch D in tnp caused a inadvertent CIS. MPFF PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a. .No unplanned automatic reactor tnp PLPC 2b: No unplanned manual reactor tnp PLPC 3. Unplanned ESF Actuations - 11/94 - CIAS witn O channel CIS tnp and 120 VAC inverter failure Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent industry Operatino Expenence: No aoverse or significant trends were noted during the review ceriod
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 49 - 120 Vital VAC inverters Updated: 7/8/96 14:58 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Dean Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Reliability- < 2 MPFFs / train for safety related inverters only, per 18 months. Unavailability- 5 8 hrs / yr OOS combined total for instrument buses. PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unrt. last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor trips less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 4 Unplanned ' Red SSA during less than 1 each outage. UNAVAILABILITY l Unit 2120 VAC Instrument Bus Unavailable Hours 10 00 l 8 00 Limit 8 Mrstyr.
. 6 00
!i o
j MMA-1 Bus ii i I
- MB Bus 4 00 j MMB-1 Bus 2.00 - I, ,MC Bus 0 00 : : : : : : : : : : : :
C3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 ' MD Bus j 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 MD-1 Bus l Penod -W- Total RELIABILITY L st all functional failures (indicate train for risk sig SSCs), and MPFFs There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functionat Failures on this system ounng this review period PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC lf PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a No unplanned automatic reactor trip PLPC 2b No unplanned manual reactor tnp l l PLPC 3 No unotanned ESF Actuations l Trenos / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Operatina Experience: No aoverse or significant trenos were noteo curing the review period i
l SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 50 " 5 VDC & chargers Updated: 7/8/96 17.35 Unit' 1 SSC Owner: Wachtel Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Unavailability U1 & U2 5 2 hrs OOS / yr for A & B DC bc ombined Reliabilrty: 5 2 MPFFs / train for A & B DC buses only, per 13 months. PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% 1r each unrt last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tops less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuat'ons less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 mnnths. PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red
- SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. I UNAVAILABILITY' i Unit i 125 VDC Bus Unavailable Hours ENEIE1 A DC Bus 1 10 00 i 8 00 j Low battery ceu voltage. - 0
^
' M1B DC Bus i ,
cellleft on charger l l 6 00 i j 4 00 - 2 00 Limit - 2 hrs /yr. 0 00 : : : : : . . Q3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 i 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod i R ELI ABILITY List all functional failures (Indicate train for risk sig SSCs). and MPFFs l Dearaded Condition leadina to COS hours 6/11/95 - A battery cell was Jumpered and subsequently replaced dunng Q2 of 1995 leading to high OOS hours PLANT LEVEL oERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC-1 Power reduction ori 6/11/95 due to a low cell voltage on safety battery (cell l PLPC 2a No unplanned automatic reactor trip 1 PLPC 2b' No unplanned manual reactor tnp PLPC 3. No unplanned ESF Actuations Trends I Recent PM Chanaes / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: 1 No adverse or significant trenas were noted dunng the review perioc
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 50 - 125 VDC & chargers Updated: 7/8/96 15-02 Unit' 2 SSC Owner: Wachtel l Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Unavailability: U1 & U2 2 2 hrs OOS / yr for A & B DC bus combined. l Reliability: $ 2 MPFFs / train for A & B DC buses only, per 18 months. ! PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unrt, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor trips less than or equal to 1 for the srte for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanneo manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. I PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each untt for last 12 months. I PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less tnan 1 each outage.
)
UNAVAILABILITY:
,g gg Unit 2125 VDC Bus Unavailable Hours ' MllHIRE 1 A DC Bus i 8 00 - l """ 1B DC Bus l l
--+-- Total f l 6 00
$ 4 00 - i 2 00 Lirnst - 8 nrs/yr.
OM : : : : : : : : : : : : 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 i Period ! 1 I RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs). and MPFFs-Train B 2/16/94 - Battery charger 2BB failed, replaced relay ( MPFF) 125V DC Train A/B 9/15/95 - Ckt bkr 60983 for MV-08-13 shorted water intrusion Loss of 1 of 3 trains AFW. ( from sys 9b)(MPFF) PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a. No unplanned automatic reactor tnp PLPC 2b No unplanned manual reactorinp. l PLPC 3. No unplanned ESF Actuation's. Trends I Recent PM Changes / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted cunng the review period.
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR ! SSC: 52 - 416kv swgr & bkrs Updated: 7/8/96 15:08 Unt 1 SSC Owner: Campbell Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Rehability < 2 MPFFs / train for A, B, and AB buses only, per 18 months Unavailabili+y g 120 hrs / yr for AB bus (SBO cross tie) PLPC 1- Unpic.ned unavailabshty less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. j PLPC 2a Unplanned automatic reactor trips less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months l PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unrt for last 12 months. l PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 monthi PLPC 4 Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage lINAVAILABILITY: Unit 1 -4.16 kV AB Bus Unavailable Hours 120 00 Lanit 120 hrsiyt t 80 00 - I 8 I 40 00 - ' 1 AB Bus i-0 00 : : : : : : : : : : :
.-+- 1 AB Bus I Q3 04 Q1 02 Q3 04 Q1 C2 03 04 Q1 Q2 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Period RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs.
1A3 ] 1/23/95 - Brkr wont ef ..e wnile trying to start 1 A HPSI pump, floor tnpper adjustment (RMPFF) ' 6/28/94 - 1 A HPSI pump failed to start, floor tnpper adjustment (RMPFF) 1 1 l 193 l 9/27/94 - LPSI Pump failed to start (416kV Swgr 183-6) ( MPFF) l l 1AB3 9/2/95 - 1C ICW brkr will not close. latch switch open (RMPFF) Decreaea condition 12/2/94 *' msformer breaker failed to auto open when 18 Aux transformer bkr. closed PLAN 1 - dRFORM ANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause ESF Actuation's 12/8/94 - Undervoltage relay failed functional test (416kV Swgr 1 A3-2) l 2/16/95 -Inadvertant load shed of the 416 kV Bus due to relay 27-5 failure dumg testing EDG start The following similar events are noted for relays faihng testing, no.t causing load shed and EDG start. I 12/8/94 - Undervoltage relay 27-2 failed functional test. (416kV Swgr 1 A3-2) Sys degraded. not MPFF 3/10/94 - Undervoltage re!ay 27 2 failed functional . test. (416kV Swgr 1 A3-8)- Sys degraced not MPFF-Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Operatina Experience: l ! Unit 1 and 2 416kV systems are in (a)(1) status due to Rehabihty as evidenced by demand failures To reverse the trend of online UV relay failures, these relays were replaced with new ones in 1995. l
I ( SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l l SSC: 52 - 416kv swgr & bkrs Updated: 7/8/96 15.08 l Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Campbell Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Reliability. 5 2 MPFFs / train for A. B. and AB buses only, per 18 months l Unavailability' 5120 hr. / yr. for AB bus (SBO cross tie) PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage UNAVAILABILITY-l Unit 2 - 4.16 kV AB Bus Unavailable Hours 120 00 Limit - 120 hr tyr i !
,,, 80 00 - 1
! M2AB Bus i !
40 00
-+-2AB Bus l 0 00 0 : : : : : : : : : : :
Q3 04 Q1 C2 C3 04 Q1 C2 03 04 Q1 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96
! Period RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs l
l l 3/1/94 - 2A AFW motor breaker would not close due to Droken cotter pin. ( from tys 9b)(MPFF) ; 1 E-8/24/94 - Breaker fails to close (416kV Swgr 283-1)(MPFF) l l 10/22/95 - Breaker 283-9 failed to close latch check switch out of aclustment (RMPFF) 6' PLANT LEVEL PEAPORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeoed determine if SSC was cause Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: Unit 1 and 2 416kV systems are in (a)(1) status due to Reliability as evidenced by demanc failures
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC: 53 Generation & Distnbution Updated: 7/8/96 14 09 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Williams & Campbell Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Unavailability: U1 & U2 5108 hrs /yr for A & B SU Transformers (per train) Reliability: $ 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months. PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor inps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 4 - Unplanned
- Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage.
UNAVAILABILITY-Unit 1 SIU Transformer Unavailable Hours 120 00 Limit 108 hrs /yr 80 00 _ _ _ j 40 00
= =
-+-.4 1A g_.4 _.4._ g 0 00 : _ _
_ '= _ m1B 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 ! 93 93 94 94 S4 94 95 95 95 95 96 96
,t $l Penod 4 """tbl RELIABILITY List all functional failures Ondicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs:
6/6/94 - 1 A Main XFMR degraded and subsequently failed due to contact with metal facia causing diff current tnp. l l l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a. 3/94 - Automatic reactor tnp due to inadvertant manipulation of Exciter Generator field breaker. I 6/94 - Automatic reactor tnp due to diff current tnp of 1 A Main Transformer due to contact with metal facia. 10/94. Automatic reactorinp due to switchyard flashover caused by lightning. PLPC 2b No unplanned manual reactor tnp PLPC 3: No unplanned ESF Actuations. PLPC 4- No unplanned " Red" SSA dunng outages Trends / Recent PM ChangetLBgstnt industry Ooeratina Exoerience: S/U Transformer OOS hrs. are due to CMM.
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR S!C: 53 - Generation & Distnbution Updated: 7/8/96 14:17 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Williams & Campbell Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Unavailability: U1 & U2 5108 hrs /yr for A & B SU Transformers (per train) Riliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months. PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned autcmatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the srte for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inp; ;ess than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 4 - Unplanned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. UNAVAILABILITY: Unit 2 SIU Transformer Unavailable Hours
- 20 00 Lirnet - 108 hrs /yr.
80 00 e j I
= = _
h 2A 28 40 00 [T O N ,
+M 0 00 _
= = = _ = --m-- 28 Q3 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Period RELIABILITV List all functional failures tindicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs 8/4/95- Air valve on transformer failed resulted in generator sync. delay, changed valve. (MPFF). A 1/5/96 - TCV-13-15 Not controlling caused manual Rx tna. PCM for He limit relay & recalib. (MPFF for Sys 13) O 6/6/96 - TCV 1315 failed due to feedback arm uncoupling, manual tnp. PCM for direct dnve (MPFF for Sys 13)
PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Repon PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a No unplanned automatic reactor inp. PLPC 2b No unplanned manual reactor tnp. PLPC 3: No unplanned ESF Actuations. PLPC 4 No unplanned " Red" SSA during outages Irends / Recent PM Changes] Recer t industry Oneratina Exoerience: l S/U Transformer OOS hrs. are predominately due to on-line maintenance. l 6/23/94 - 2A S/U Transformer OOS due to fire in relaying cabinent. l l I l
\
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l l l l ! SSC: 59 - EDGs u m.
- Updated: 7/9/96 17:28 )
l l Unit: 1 i SSC Owner: Kulavich l Department: SCE l Performance Criteria;. ) Unavailabdity: U1 & U2 5 240 hr./yr. per A & B train Reliability: 12 MPFFs / train per 18 months. Start Test: Tnggers: 3/20; 4/50; S/100 j PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. ) l PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 4 - Unp!anned ' Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage. l UNAVAILABILITY- (As reported to INPO) l Unit 1 EDG Unavailable Hours i 350 00 l 300 00 250 00 Limit 240 hr/yr. e 200 00 s
$ 150 00 100 00 *., g=3lll2531 A EDG 50 00 -
J ***S***#~~ ' *+ . . ****** ** ~~
--- ~
O 00 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 Q2 03 04 Q1 Q1 - + 1 A EDG . 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 gn;,; Period 1BEDG
.,,.10tal RELIABILITY: List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs) and MPFFs: l Train B 10/28/94 - 1B EDG . OOC loose connection at volt. regulator. STAR 1-9410372&1-950067 (MPFF) 5/17/95 - 182 EDG failure to load. replaced govemor actuator. STAR 1-950059&1-950529(RMPFF) 9/1/95 1B EDG inpped No. 9 power pack piston & head replaced. STAR 1-951021&1-951031 5/2/96 Bkr. would not close. replaced relay.CR-96-0621 Qggr.aded Condition leadina to OOS holga, Trarn A 11/16/95 - Start up air tank valve V-59125 leakege severe enough to render out of service. Loss of 1 of 4 6/6/95 - 1 A1 EDG tnpped by TS-59-002A (shutdown t<.mo switch). Cause revealed incorrect calibration.
5/4/93 1 A2 EDG tnpped by TS-59-003a. which was bad. New t, witch modelinstalled. Train B 10/5/95 - Dunng sury. run.1B 12-cyl engine exhibited a fuel leak, degrading 1 of 2 trains 9/5/95 - 1B EDG loaded - didn't control properly. Govemor alignment & MOP replacement. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause ESF actuations-Jan/94 - 1 A3 bus loadshed and EDG start dunng UV relay replacement. Feb/95 1 A3 bus loadshed and EDG start dunng UV relay replacement. Mar /96 EDG start due to bumped relay by I&C dunng PCM implementation. Unit i lost 15 days of availability due to EDG govemor overhauls / grounds and 182 cylinder failure. Trends i Recent PM Changes i Recent industrv Ooeratina Exoenence: The 1B EDG has exceeded the unavailabdity performance entena. The EDGs have expenenced degradation's and failures causing an exceedmg reliability entena. The EDGs are in (a)(1) status (repetitive MPFF - U1/U2 EDGs). See Fig. 4 for goals /monitonng activities.
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR 1 SSC: 59 ,EDGs Updated: 7/9/96 16'49 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Kulavich I Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Unavadability: U1 & U2 5 240 hrs /yr per A & B train l Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months. Start Test: Triggers: 3/20; 4/50; 5/100 PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 4 - Unplanned
- Red" SSA dunng less than 1 each outage.
UNAVAllABILITY: (As reported to INPO) 350.00 300 00 50 00 Limit - 240 hrs /yr ta 200 00 3
- $ 150 00 ,,,,,,,,,.4., ,
100 00 ,,,** 5 -
'A- 2A EDG' 50 00 0 00 N
[ " 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 **+ 2A EDG ; 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96
--e-- 2B EDG i Period RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs:
Ifal!13 11/4/95 - 2A EDG failed to start on demand. Problem found to be with Curtis relay sockets 12/14/94 - 2A 12-cyl engine did not load due to mech. binding of govem act. affecting speed control (RMPFF) Dearadations-A 3/9/94 - Diesel Fuel Oil spill due to failed solenoid on 2A2 Day Tank. g 1/16/96 - 2B EDG OOS due to dust accumulation from painting activities. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeced determine if SSC was cause Trends / Recent PM Changes / Recent industry Oneratina Ex29AtnGE.; 1 The EDGs are in (a)(1) due to failures with tne governor actuators See Fig. 4 attached to STAR # j 960024 for goal setting and monitonng activities. l l I
. . __ - ~ ~ ~ _ . _
- . - - - . _ . _ _- - - . - - . . ~ _ . ..
1 i SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR , l SSC; 60 Station Grounding Updated: 7/8/96 14:25 l Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Clark Department: SCE Performance critaria: ) Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / system per 18 months. PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 mon'hs. PLPC 2b e Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. 1 R ELI ABILITY: List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: ! l There were no Functional Failures or Main'ei.ance Preventable Functional Failures on this system cunng this review penod PLANT LEVEL PERFORM ANCE , Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 1: 55% PLPC 2a No unplanned automatic reactor trips. PLPC 2b: No unplanised marual reactor inps. PLPC 3. No unplanned ES Actuations. l l Trends I Recent PM Channes I heent industrv Ooeratina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod. l
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 60 - Station Grounding Updated: 7/8/96 14'25 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Clark Department: SCE l Performance Criterin l Reliability: 12 MPFFs / system per 18 months. l PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. l PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor inrs less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. ' PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. 1 RELIABitJTY_ List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this review penod. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 1: 55% PLPC 2a: No unplanned automatic reactor tnps. PLPC 2b. No unplanned manual reactor tnps. PLPC 3. No unplanned ESF Actuations. Inndi/ Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Ooeratina Excenence: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod E
. . . - _ - . - . - - . . - . . . _ . . ~ _ ~ . ..
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 62 - Reactor Regulatmg Updated: 7/8/96 16:58 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Schmid & Kirby Department: I&C Performance Criteria: Reliabstrty: < 2 MPFFs for SBCS per 18 months PLPC 1 Unptanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unrt, last 12 months, PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor trips less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor trips less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months.
~*
PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC during the review penod FAILURES List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs. 3/29/96 - Results of 3yr. hist. review of failures documented on PMAI #PM96-03-541. Deoradations 2/96 - SBCS degradations noted after Rx trip. Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trends were noted during the review period. i
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 62 Ressor Regulating Updated: 7/8/96 16.58 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Schmid & Kirby Department: I&C Performance Criteria: Reliability: $ 2 MPFFs for SBCS, per 18 montns PLPC1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. FLPC 2a - Unplarmed automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for tne site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. 1 PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause ) i No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review period FAILURES List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs: 9/15/93 - RRS-2 problem causing Pzr to go low Failed pwi supply. (MPFF) 4/23/94 - SBCS failures dunng power ascension 1/95 - SBCS and Low power Feedwater control system instabilities l Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatino Experience: No aoverse or significant trends were noted cunng the review period
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR . , SSC: 63 - RPS Updated: 7/9/96 10.34 i Unit: 1 - SSC Owner: Schmid & Hiegal , Department: I&C i Performance Criteria: Unavailability: 5 54 hrs /yr. for any part of RPS placing unit in shutdown LCO.
- Reliability
- 5 2 MPFFs / measurement channel type & ESF function per 18 months.
PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b Unplanned manual reactor trips less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months.
~
4 PLPC 3 Unplanned ESF Actuebons less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY: (OOS hours for any part of RPS which places the unit in a shutdown LCO, Modes 1,2 and 3.) l I l Unit 1 RPS Unavailable Hours < 6 00 ... ...... . .. . . .. . ... .. ... . ... Limst - 54 hrs /yr. 40.00 l g 3400 RPS function ' l
- 20.00 l f 10 00 --e- Total RPS l 0 00 : : : : 0 = = = = = 1 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 '
Period REllABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk so SSCs), and MPFFs: VHPT Train 8/13/93 VHPT pretnp, caused by ground on Det. #7, channel by. passed. ( MPFF) 9/11/95 - VHPT 182 cold leg TE shorting due to RCP oil intrusion, - SUR Train 11/22/94 - Hi Rate connector on bistable card. l RCS Flow Tra!D 11/10/93 - Low RCS Flow bistable connector pins, poor contact. Pressure Train i 11/3/94 - Cont. Hi Press poor pin contact on bistable. ( MPFF) l Level Train 12/1/94 - SG Level Low - bistable connector pins, poor contact. TM/LP Train 8/13/93 - TM/LP pretnp caused by ground on Det. #7. channel by passed. ( MPFF for sys 64) 9/11/95 - TM/LP - 182 cold leg TE shorting due to RCP oil entrusion. 2/7/96 TM/LP - PIA-1102D failed high, channel by-passed. LPD Train ' 6/1/95 - LPD - short in Det. #8 degraded channel. ( MPFF for sys 64 ) l 8/13/93 - LPD - pretnp caused by ground on Det. #7, channel by-passed. (MPFF for sys 64 ) 9/11/95 - LPD - 182 cold leg TE shorting due to RCP oil intrusion. VHPT Train 8/13/93 - VHPT pretnp, caused by ground on Cet. #7, channel by-passed. ( MPFF) 9/11/95 - VHPT - 182 cold leg TE shorting due to RCP oil intrusion. TCBS Train 8/21/93 - Undervoltage cond. (relay 27-1) on CEDM bus caused loss of 1 of 4 Ch TCBs. 10/28/94 - Dunng Rx inp, uv relay 11812 (part of TCB 1) did not send proper actuation to TCB. (MPFF) PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: No PLPC exceedance due to RPS Trends / Recent PM Chanoes / Recent Industry Ooeratina Exoerience: TE problem is to be resolved with a design change in refueling of 1996 with Raychem splicing. Bistable contact problem is a design change candidate and is under review by the Expert Panel 5/15/96.
i SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC: 63 - RPS Updated: 7/9/96 10:39 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Schmid & Hiegal Department: I&C Performance Criteria:_ Unavailability: 5 54 hrs /yr. for any part of RPS placing urit in shutdown LCO. I Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / measurement channel type & ESF function per 18 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY (OOS hours for any part of PPS which places the unit in a shutdown LCO. Modes 1,2 and 3.) Unit 2 RPS Unavailable Hours 60 00 - - - -- - Limit - 54 hrs /yr. 50 00 Forced outage due + ^ 0 c
^
30 0 I 20 00 i TCB-5 failure iNot a MPFR 100 00 00 l . . . . . . . . Q3 04 Q1 02 03 04 01 02 03 04 01 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 -+-- Total RPS Period RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs: VHPT Train 4/13/94 - VHPT - bad connector pins. - (were replaced with new style 1/96 per PC/M 008 295) 1/8/93 VHPT no trouble found, connector pins cleaned. (Changed per PC/M 008-295) I 12/16/93 - VHPT - bad pots - replaced (Changed per PC/M 008-295) l 2/26/95 - VHPT - cause unknown. (Changed per PC/M 008-295)( MPFF) 6/14/95 - VHPT - bad connector pins. (Changed per PC/M 008-295) SUR Train 5/9/94 Hi Rate - cause unknown (Changed per PC/M 008-295)(MPFF) RCS Flow Train 6/4/95 - Low RCS - Flow, failed bistable. (MPFF) 1/9/96 RCS Low Flow Tnp bistable out of service due to teauent pre trip alarms. STAR 0-94120517 RCS Pressure Train 10/4/95 - Hi Pzr Press circuit board improperly int talled. (MPFF) LER 389-94006 wntten to document notification of manufacturer of breaker failure to open (TCB-5,7/94) caused by phenolic insulation loosening and falling into tnp latch mecnanism PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeced determine if SSC was cause A unit snutdown was performed to effect repairs on TCB-5 in July,1994 Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Res;ent Industry Ooerating Exoerience: l LER 389 94006 written to cocument notification of manufacturer of breaker failure (TCB-5. 7/94) l causmg phenolic insulation to loosen and fallinto tnp latch mechanism Repetitive failures with the VHPT measurement channel were attnbuted to BNC connector failures which were stressed by inflexible cables This vendor design problem was rectified by PCM 008-295
, - - . - - - _ _ . _ - . = . . . --~ -. - . - . . - . .- -
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 64 - Nuclear instrumentation , Updated: 7/8/96 16:12 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Schmid & Heigel Department: I&C Performance criteria: Reliabilty: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months. PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuatens less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. RELIABILITY: List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: TM/LP Train 8/13/93 - TM/LP pretnp, caused by ground on Det. #7, channel by-passed. ( from sys 63)( MPFF) LPD Train 8/13/93 LPD - pretnp caused by ground on Det. #7. channel by-passed. (from sys 63 )(MPFF) 6/1/95 - LPD - short in Det. #8 degraded channel. ( from sys63 ) (MPFF) VHPT Train 9/11/95 - VHPT 182 cold leg TE shoding due to RCP eil intrusion. (from sys 63 )(MPFF) PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a. No unplanned automatic reactor tnps. l PLPC 2b: No unplanned manual reactor tnps. PLPC 3. No unplanned ESF Actuations. 1 l Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent indust;v Ooeratino Exoerience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review penod. l PC/M 009195 replaces Excore Nuetron detection and NI drawers. l 1 1
t.iSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 64 - Nuclear instrumentation Updated: 7/8/96 16:12 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Schmid & Hergel Department: ISC Performance Critena: Reliabilty: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months. PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailabihty less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 rnonths. PLPC 3 - Unplanned ESF Actuations less than or equal to 1 each unit for last 12 months. RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs: There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this review penod PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: Report PLPC If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a No unplanned automatic reactor inps. PLPC 2b. No unplanned manual reactor tnps. PLPC 3: No unplanned ESF Actuations. 1 1 1 I_rgods r / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent Industrv Ooeratina Excenence: l No adverse or sign: fica it trends were noted dunng the review penod. I PC/M 008-295 replaces Excore Nuetron detection and Ni drawers ' w I
--. .- = . . _ . - .. .~ . . - - - - - _ - . . ~ . . -- . . - - - . . - . - . . - . - - - SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 66 CEDM Updated: 7/8/96 17.57 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Sherman & Newhouse Department: I&C Performance criteria: PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned auto _matic reactor tnps less than or equal to 1 for the site for last 12 months j PLPC 2b Unplant.?d manual reactor tnps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE- , Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No PLPC exceedance due to Unit 1 CEDM , FAILURES List all failures. corrective actions and MPFFs: I None for this review pened Dearadations 11/1/93 - Rod
- 63 dropped due to timer card not properly seated 8/26/93 - Rod #3 dropped dunng monthly inserton test. Cause unknown.
3/4/96 Rod #1 dropped dunng MTC testing (timer card replaced 3/2/96) 2/22/96 - Rod #20 dropped dunng CEA exercise test of Rod #57, grnd of an SCR phase. 2/23/96 - Rod #47 dropped during CEA testing due to loose electncal connection (Plant was in Mode 3) 4/28/96 - Rod # 1 dropped dunng downpower for refuel Power switch and timer modules replaced 5/24/96 High gnpper voit on group 5 dropped CEA on shutdown group B(IHR 96-041) 6/10/93 - 18 M/G set tnpped causing loss of 1 of 2 Ch. rod control pwr due to defective relay. Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent inr ostry ODeratina ExDerience: One random CEA orop did not evidence any malfunction and was most probably attributed to sticking in the mecnanism ! I&C has proposed a modification to the timer modules using ACTM technology similar to that used in unit 2. l&C to review procedure and work practices associated with the setting of CEA timer modules to ensure proper methods are applied. NRC Bulletin 88-10 addresses molded case breaker failures.
e l l SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 66 - CEDM Updated: 7/8/96 14 40 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Sherman & Newhouse Department: l&C l Performance criteria: PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. PLPC 2a - Unplanned automatic reactor tnps less than or equal to i for the site for last 12 months. PLPC 2b - Unplanned manual reactor inps less than or equal to 2 each unit for last 12 months. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause 5/23/93 - manual reator tnp due to CEDMCS trouble resulting in dropped rods. 2/96 - manual reactor tnp due to CEA-20 dropped and IAFRV air leak FAILURES List all failures. corrective actions and MPFFs: (attach supporting documents as applicable. e.g CRs. ADM 17.08 Figs. etc.) 5/21/93 - Rod # 8 dropped due to molded case circuit bkr failure. Reactor was manually tnpped ( MPFF)
- Rod # 60 dropped due to ground in CEDMCS cables in Elec. Pen D-1. (MPFF)
- Rods # 61. 63. 65. 67 dropped due to ground in CEDMCS cables in Elec. Pen D-1 (MPFF)
- Rod # 54 dropped oue to ground in CEDMCS cables in Elec. Pen D-1. (MPFF)
Regr.adations. 4/28/95 - Rod # 80 voltage spike due to faulty Opto-isolator board. May cause failure on next demand. 5/20/94 - Rod # 85 missing A phase of lift coil due to faulty Opto-isolator board May fail on next demand. 5/20/94 - Rod # 44 missing A phase of lift coil due to faulty Opto-isolator board. May fail on next demar'd 5/24/96 - Rod # 12 dropped due to high gripper voltage. Intrids_LRecent PM Chances / Recent industry Ooeratino Experien_gr I&C and EM tested all molded case breakers in CEDMCS. Failure rate was 72%. I&C Maintenance nas developed a 5-year plan for cnanging out one third of all breakers Due to grounds at the D-1 Elec. Pen. l&C has set-up a 5-year plan to test each lead at the control rod cabinet to the control coils This information is sent to ABB/CE for evaluation g l&C now performs a weekly PM to check for abnormal voltatge spikes Dunng CEDMCS exercise. Rod Latch / Rod drop testing, and startup I&C takes coil traces to venfy proper phase logic l&C replaced 10 optical-isolator boards last refueling outage due to aging. NRC Bulletin 88-10 addresses molded case breaker failures. l l l l [ t
s e SSC PERFORMANCE INDlQATOR SSC:67 FuelHandhng Updated: 7/8/96 14:38 u- , Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Daily Department: OST Performance Criteria: PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailabilrty less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. RELIABILITY: List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this review penod. DegradattoDE 6/11/96 - V4111 stem separated twice dunng SL 1-14 refueling (did not unduly affect outage duration), PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 1: 55% IIRDds I Recent PM Channes / Recent industry Operatina Experienqq No adverse or signrficant trends were noted dunng the review penod. F
- l SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 67 - Fuel Handling Updated: 7/8/96 14.38 Unit: 2 !
SSC Owner: Daily l Department: OST l Performance Criteria: PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailabihty less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. I BELIABILITY' List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this review penod. ' PLANT LEVEL PERFORM ANCE: Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Ooeratina Exoerience: No adverse or significant trenos were noted during the review penod. 1 l 1 1 1 i 1 l
_ - . . _ _ _~ - ~ .. . . . _ _ _ .~ . _ _ . _ _ _ . - _ . _ _ . . _ _ _
. l l
l e l s SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR > SSC: 68 - Containment Penetrations Updated: 7/8/96 17.32 #,. _ . I ( Unit: 1 l i SSC Owner: Sesscente Department: OGT Performance Criteria: ; ILRTs; U1 and U2 ILRT 5 0.6La : LLRTs U1 and U2 LLRTs 5 Action Limit each penetration l Reliability: $ 2 MPFFs / system, per 18 months ] PLPC 1; Unplanned unavailability 5 5% / year for each unrt. PLPC 4: 0 ILRT- (Total Type B and C Leakage) , Unit 1 Containment Penetration Leakage - Plant Limit 0.60 La = 544,933 sccm 500.000 f l ' l {o400.000 - i
! i l I >
? 300.000
, = 30,000 ,
l J 100.000 3 !
; 's
= i 0
Jan-93 Aug-93 Mar-94 Sep-94 Apr-95 Oct-95 May-96 Penod REllAB'LITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs). and MPFFs' (attach supporting documents as applicable, e.g CRs. ADM 17.08 Figs. etc ) 11/94 - P V-18195 - failed admin limit (found worn and pitted). Valve replaced. No maint. since 12/91. 11/94 P V 14415 - failed admin limit and left in failed condition No prev maint. this penod. 11/94 - P-52A - FCV-201 - failed admin limrt and left in failed condition. No prev maint this penod. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE i- Report PLPC if PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No PLPC 4 exceedance. l Trends / Recent PM Chances i Recent industry Operatina Experience: 1 All containment penetrations are performance trended by the OST group. Components showing ) previous failures were evaluated for cause as per above Diablo Canyon also tracks as performance entena for containment penetrations. percent of component type failures This methodology is currently under review for use at St Lucie
~
l i i
e o SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC: 68 - Containment Penetrations Updated: 7/8/96 17.32 Unit: 2 l SSC Owner: Sciscente Department: OST Performance Criteria: ILRTs' U1 and U2 ILRT $ 0 6La LLRTs U1 and U2 LLRTs $ Action Limit each penetration Reliabilrty- 12 MPFFs / system. per 18 months PLPC 1: Unplanned unavailability 15% / year for each unit. PLPC 4'. O ILRT (Total Type B and C Leakage) Unit 2 Containment Penetration Leakage - Plant Limit 0.60 La= 567000 scem j i 500.000 i fv400.000 y 200.000 - As Found i en j 200.000 a,
" 100.000
- : 5 Dec 91 Jul-92 Jan-93 Aug-93 Mar-94 Sep-94 Apr 95 Oct-95 May-96 Dec 96 Jun-97 Penod REllABILITY~ List all functional failures (indicate train for risk sig SSCs), and MPFFs 10/95 D SH-18-797 - failed admin limit (no maint. history) 10/95 - P V-181270 - failed acmin limit. Valve replacea (last maint history was 5/92) 10/95 - P-28A - SE-05-1B - clug scored anc pitted Valve recaired No pnor maint history this pened 10/95 D FCV-25 36 - wear on seat. new O-nng and seat Last f ailed test 10'90.
2/94 - P 41- SE-03-2A - valve internals inspected Sat Valve rebuilt Leak perf trending poor (MPFFT 2/94 P tSB - V-27101 - valve replaced (no maint history this perioc) 1/6/95 - STAR # 2-950042 cocuments leaking feedthrougn mocuie problem with Elect Pen Module D-6 Denetration mocuies C-1 C-5. C-8 D-3 D-6 also are probiems fromieak test results Root cause revealed chlorine inauced stress corrosion cracking occuring at feedthrougn sealing surface. Cause is inceterminate 4/12/96 - RCB eut penetratien air lock shaft seal failec (MPFF) Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: All containment penetrations are performance trended by the OST group Components snowing previous failures were evaluated for cause as per above Root cause deterrnination for containment penetration failures is in-process ) Diablo Canyon also tracks as cerformance entena for containment penetrations, percent of component I type failures This metnocciogy is currently under review for use at St Lucie ) l
l I l ' SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR \ . i SSC: 69 ESFAS & Annuncastors Updated: 7/9/96 15:31 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Sherman & Newhouse Department: I&C Performance Criteria: Unavailabihty: 5 54 hrstyr for any part of ESFAS placing the unit in shutdown LCO. Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / measurement channel type & ESF function per 18 months. l l l l l l PLPC 6 - Unplanned, reportable loss of annunciation in the control room less than or equal to 1 last 12 months. , f I UNAVAILABILTY. (OOS hours for any part of ESFAS which places the unit in a shutdown LCO. Modes 1-3.) ! Unit 1 ESFAS Unavailable Hours 60 00 Limit - 54 hrs /yr. 45 00 m
$ 30.00 I M ESFAS (SA) -
15 00 , C"" 3ESFAS (SB) 0 00 = = = = = = = = = = = = --G-Total ESFAS 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 03 04 Q1 02 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Period RELIABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for risk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: CBS 11/17/93 CIAS tnp due to spunous signal from rad monitor channel with another channel in tnp. SBS 9/13/95 CIAS/SIAS C tnpped due to power supply failing low, aging.(MPFF) 10/10/95 SIAS/CIAS ATI failure due to bistable card aging. 6/96 SlAS/CIAS due to potential winng discrepancy. 7/3/96 RAS & CSAS due to potential winng discrepancy. ATWAS 10/20/93 ATWAS channel failure due to bistable aging. EMS 9/13/95 RAS B inpped due to power supply failure, aging. (MPFF) PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a: No unplanned automatic reactor tnp attnbuted to U1 ESFAS. PLPC 2b: No unplanned manual reactor tnp attnbuted to U1 ESFAS. PLPC 3: Unplanned ESF Actuations: (See indicator for PLPC 3) 11/93 CIAS dunng M1 rad channel in inp with additional module failure 11/94 - SIAS dunng M5 due to pressure transmitter failure (Part 21) 11/94 - CIAS with D channel in CIS trip and 120 VAC inverter failure PLPC 6: No Unplanned, reportable loss of annunciation in control room dunng review penod. Trends / Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Ooeratina Exnerience-PC/M 021 1900 allows for the "as fail
- replacement of ESFAS bistabies.
I
SSC PERFORMANCE INQlCATOR SSC: 69 , ESFAS & Annunciators Updated: 7/9/96 15:29 , Unit: 2 ! SSC Owner: Sherman & Newhouse Department: l&C l Performance Criteria: l Unavaslabikty: 5 54 hrs /yr for any part of ESFAS placing the unit in shutdown LCO. Rehabihty: 12 MPFFs / measurement channel type & ESF function per 18 months. PLPC 6 - Unplanned. repcrtable loss of annu: ;iation in the control room less than or equal to 1 last 12 months. UNAVAILABILITY (OOS hours for any part of ESFAS which places the unit in a shutdown LCO. Modes 13.) 60.00 Unit 2 ESFAS Unavailable Hours Limit - 54 hrs /yr
$ 30 00 15 00 M ESFAS (SA) 0 00 = = = = = = = = = = = = P 'ESFAS (SB)
Q3 04 Q1 Q2 03 04 01 02 03 04 Q1 Q2 -s- Total ESFAS 93 93 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 95 96 96 Penod REllABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: Sl.A,$ 7/13/1994 SIAS (pressunzer press) bistable would not reset. aging 1/14/93 SIAS D (Pressunzer pressure block) would not block due to a failed relay, aging. BAS 7/3/93 RAS D (RWT level) failing low requinng manual channelinp, power supply ES-302, aging 7/15/93 RAS D (RWT level) power supply ES-402 faihng low. aging. 11/16/93 RAS B (RWT level) transmitter could not be cahbrateA aging Degradat i on 1/22/96 Loss of annunciators on RTGB 203. 204& 205. lHE 96-009 PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded oetermine if SSC was cause PLPC 2a: No unplanned automatic reactor tnp attnbuted to U2 ESFAS. PLPC 2b: No unplanned manual reactor tnp attnbuted to U2 ESFAS. PLPC 3 No unplanned ESF Actuations attnbuted to U2 ESFAS. PLPC 6. No Unplanned. reportable loss of annunciation in control room dunng review penod Trends I Recent PM Chanaes / Recent industry Ooeratina Exoenence: PC/M 021-1900 allows for the "as fail" replacement of ESFAS bistables. I No other RAS channel problems since 1993 indicate tnat this is now reliable.
.. -. . . . - . - . - - . . . ~ . _ _ - - - ~ - . . . .,-.- - - - - . . - - . ~ . . . . - - . ~ - - _ - .
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 70. QSPDS Updated: 7/8/96 17.02 l Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Huber & Ordway j Department: l&C Performance Criteria: Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train, per 18 months PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. RELIABluTY List all functional failures (indicate train forrisk s'g SSCs), and MPFFs: l , No functional failures or MPFFs identified ; f F I i i PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC txceeded determine if SSC was cause l No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded cue to this SSC during the review penod. 4 s Trends i Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Operatina Experience: No adverse or significant trenos we r4 noted dunng the review period. i n 3 t
1 l 1 J SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 70. OSPDS Updated: 7/8/96 14:49 Unit: 2 l SSC Owner: Huber & Ordway I Department: I&C J Perforrnance Criteria: i Reliabihty: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months. PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability .tess than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. RELIABILITY: Lcst all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: Channel B 12/27/95 - Display indicates all HJTCS failed Field readings no problem. Loss of B Ch. display. 9/14/93 - No operable CETs on B Ch. Trouble found resultant of dirty end conns on board. (MPFF) 3/17/96 - OSPDS Cab B failed due to frequency excursion Replaced fuse. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE Report PLPC. .lf PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No Plant Level Performance Cntena exceeded due to this SSC dunng the review pened Trends / Rgggpt PM Changes / Recent Industry Operatino Exnerienct No adverse or significant trenos were noted dunng the review penod / l l
' t, SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 73 , Structures Updated: 7/5/96 13:32 Unit: 1 SSC Owner: Hollowell Department: Eng Performance Criteria:
Reliabikty: 5 0 MPFFs per train per 18 month penod Condition: Satisfactory inspections PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unst, last 12 months. REllABILITY- List all failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this review penod. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause 1 l Trends I Recent PM Chanaes I Recent industry Ooeratina Experience: l i 1
i O SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 73 , Structures Updated: 7/5/96 13:32 Unit: 2 SSC Owner: Hollowell l Department: Eng l Performance Criteria: l Reliability: 5 0 MPFFs per train per 18 month pened Condition: Satisfactory inspections PLPC 1- Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. l l l l RELIABILITY: List all failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this review penod. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE. Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause Trends / Recent PM Chances / Recent Industry Ooeratina Exoerience: 1 i l 1 l l I 1 i l l
\
e t SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR i
~
l SSC: 75 Cathodic Protection Updated: 7/8/96 14:53 l Unit: 1 l S?C Owner: Clark ! Department: SCE l l Performance Criteria: j l Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months. l l PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit, last 12 months. l i RELIABILITY: List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), and MPFFs: 1-There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this review penod. PLANT LEVEL PERFORM ANCE Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 1: 15% Trends / Recent PM Chanaes I Recent Industry Ooeratina Exoerience: No adverse or significant trends were noted dunng the review period. I 1 $ _ _
e 4 SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
]
SSC: 75 , Cathodic Protection Updated: 7/8/96 14:56 Unit. 2 SSC Owner: Clark Department: SCE Performance Criteria: Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs / train per 18 months. PLPC 1 Unplanned unavailability less than or equal to 5% for each unit. last 12 months. REllABILITY List all functional failures (indicate train for nsk sig SSCs), and MPFFs: There were no Functional Failures or Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures on this system dunng this raview penod. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause PLPC 1: 5 5% (Unit unavailability 3/95 due to through wall leaks on Cire Water discharge due to design and PMT deficiencies.) Trends / Recent PM Changes / Recent industry Ooeratina Exornence. No adverse or sign:ficant trends were noted dunng the review penod. I 1 l l 1
e J SECTION 7- MAINTENANCE RULE GLOSSARY OF TERMS SSCs - Structures. Systems and Components that are within the scope of the Maintenance Rule. Condition (a)(1)-The section of 10 CFR 50.65 that requires goal setting and monitoring for SSCs. At St. Lucie this designation indicates performance needs improvement. Condition (a)(2) - The section of 10 CFR 50.65 that permits exemption from monitoring under-section (a)(1). At St. Lucie this designation indicates performance is satisfactory. Functional Failure - The failure of a system or train such that the system or train is not capable of performing its intended function (s). Function refers to the function (s) of a system or train causing that system or train to be included in the scope of the Maintenance Rule. When a functional failure occurs during a test. the failure must be evaluated to determine whether the same functional failure would have occurred during an actual demand or in the absence of the test conditions during operation. If so. the failure is a functional failure. Maintenance Preventable Functional Failure -(MPFF)- Failure of a Maintenance Rule SSC to perform its intended function that should have been prevented by the performance of appropriate maintenance actions. These actions include:
- training
- correct procedures
- correct preventive maintenance
- implementation of vendor recommendations
- consideration ofindustry operating experience
- following procedures
- appropriate predictive maintenance Repetitive Maintenance Preventable Functional Failure - A second Maintenance Preventable Functional Failure due to the same cause that occurs following an initial Maintenance Preventable Functional Failure and implementation of corrective action, within two operating cycles.
Performance Criteria (Criteria) - Performance Criteria are established for all SSCs to set a standard for adequate performance. Performance Criteria are reasonable objectives that permit a pre-analyzed level of failure and routine maintenance. Failure to meet Perfonnance Criteria may put an SSC into (a)(1) and goal setting. P Unavailability - A performance criteria which is the amount of time, over a given repming , period. that a system or train is not operational when required: that is, eithec not in operation or l not capable of being put into operation if demand requires it. l Reliability - A performance criteria which is a measure of the expectation that a SSC will i perform its function upon demand at any future instant in time. The measure of reliability will I be based on the number of maintenance preventable functional failures. for a given SSC.
e 5 l 1 Goal Setting and Monitoring - When performance does not meet Performance Criteria. goals l must be set for improvement. Goals may be more specific objectives for component I monitoring to address the reason that performance is not acceptable. The SSC is then ! monitored against the goal. When the goal is met the SSC is placed back into (a)(2). If corrective actions are taken, they must be monitored for effectiveness prior , moving the SSC I back into (a)(2). Expert Panel- A designated group who are responsible for review and approval of the implementation of the Rule. This multi-discipline group is identified by title and will routinely assemble to review and approve program attributes. System Owners - Those persons designated as responsible and accountable for overall i cognizance regarding assigned SSCs and for the performance of actions required to implement l the Maintenance Rule. l l Equivalent Availability Factor - The ratio of gross available generation to gross maximum l generation. expressed as a percent. l l l l
MAINTENANCE RULE EXPERT PANEL MEETLNG MINUTES DATE: 27 June,1996 Mike Snyder CHAIRMAN: SYSTEM OWNER: Ed Hollowell MEMBERS: Jim Porter (SCE) Brien Vincent (PSA) Bob Czachor (SRO) (NOTE - At least one of the members shall be from the PSA Group, at i SRO license or certificate at PSL) TOPICS REVIEWED
- 1. The first items on the agenda was a review of the St. Luciel Structures Scoping as presented by Ed Hollowell. The panel members reviewed the scoping m for structures. The panel members were told that there four were no exceptions t guidance, and that the St. Lucie scoping was done by bench markin other sites, including Turkey Point. h in NUREG the lessons teamed from those sites, as well as the NRC p year historical review of structures at St. Lucie.
- 2. The primary purpose of the meeting was to complete the review of Sum systems included in the scope of the Maintenance Rule.
by reviewing the scoping matrix in a handout form with the panel membe purpose of such a summary for each system. The methodology for apply functions was discussed, which was based on the scoping for a given system. Th Summaries presented to the panel members was a revision to the previous dr d feedback established by the previous Maintenance Rule coordinator. The panel then provide for a top level entique of the summaries for systems 37 through 75
- 3. With Mike Snyder committing to incorporate the detailed comments l that the m provided, system summaries for 37 through 75 were approved This complete review and approval of the system summaries.
4. As a final review item, the panel reviewed a rough draft of the second Main Quarterly report for 1996. The members pomted out some discrepancies relate h definite unavailability tracking for A side systems. Additionally, Bob hi Czachor pointed out t e need to specifically address in the report the reason for many systems exce performance criteria in the late 1994 time frame. reason for this u i unavailability in 1994, SSCs were removed from service voluntarily ii to perform preve maintenance. The panel members agreed that a prior exceedence of the unava f D
did not warrant a(1) consideration if there was a documented rationale for the ' spike', and if the unavailability for the SSC was currently below the performance criteria limit. ACTION ITEMS i
- 1. Mike Snyder to incorporate the detailed comments provided by the panel on summaries for systems 37 through 75, and to distribute the result to panel members and system owners.
- 2. Mike Snyder to ensure that the reason for high unavailability for SSCs in the late 1994 time frame are documented in the 2nd Quarterly Report, and to maintain supporting documentation. (Completed 7/3/96) l l
{ l l l l F h
MAINTENANCE RULE EXPERT PANEL MEETING MINUTES DATE: 27 June,1996 CHAIRMAN: Mike Snyder MEMBERS: Jim Porter (SCE) SYSTEM OWNER: Ed Hollowell Brien Vincent (PSA) Bob Czachor (SRO) (NOTE - At least one of the members shall be from the PSA Group, at least one have held a SRO license or certificate at PSL) TOPICS REVIEWED
- 1. The first items on the agenda was a review of the St. Lucie Structures Scoping Document as presented by Ed Hollowell. The panel members reviewed the scoping matrix methodology for structures. The panel members were told that there were no exceptions taken to the NEI guidance, and that the St. Lucie scoping was done by bench marking against at least four '
other sites, including Turkey Point. As a result, the St. Lucie scoping document incorporated the lessons learned from those sites, as well as the NRC pilot inspections shown in NUREG 1522. Based on this top level review, the expert panel approved the scoping matrix and three year historical review of structures at St. Lucie.
- 2. The primary purpose of the meeting was to complete the review of Summaries for those systems included in the scope of the Maintenance Rule. Mike Snyder began this discussion by reviewing the scoping matrix in a handout form with the panel members, and stating the purpose of such a summary for each system. The methodology for applying the MRule functions was discussed, which was based on the scoping for a given system. The System Summaries presented to the panel members was a revision to the previous draft descriptions established by the previous Maintenance Rule coordinator. The panel then provided feedback for a top level critique of the summaries for systems 37 through 75
- 3. With Mike Snyder committing to incorporate the detailed comments that the members i provided, system summaries for 37 through 75 were approved. This completed expert panel review and approval of the system summaries.
- 4. As a final review item, the panel reviewed a rough draft of the second Maintenance Rule Quarterly report for 1996. The members pointed out some discrepancies related to unavailability tracking for A side systems. Additionally, Bob Czachor pointed out the definite need to specifically address in the report the reason for many systems exceeding their performance criteria in the late 1994 time frame Mik: Snyder nentioned that the primary reason for this unavailability ' spike' was that in the absence of performance criteria for l unavailability in 1994. SSCs were removed from service voluntanly to perform preventive maintenance. The panel members agreed that a prior exceedence of the unavailability criteria .
( did not warrant a(1) consideration if there was a documented rationale for the ' spike *, and if the unavailability for the SSC was currently below the performance criteria limit. l 1 ACTION ITEMS
- 1. Mike Snyder to incorporate the detailed comments provided by the panel on summaries for systems 37 through 75, and to distribute the result to panel members and system owners.
l l 2. Mike Snyder to ensure that the reason for high unavailability for SSCs in the late 1994 time frame are documented in the 2nd Quarterly Report, and to maintain supporting documentation. (Completed 7/3/96) l l l d
MAINTENANCE RULE EXPERT PANEL 61EETING MINUTES l DATE: 8 July,1996 CHAIRMAN: Mike Snyder MEMBERS: Joe Price (SCE) CONSULTANT: RJ Davis (OM) Brien Vincent (PSA) OBSERVER: Charlie Rossie Bill Hagar (SRO) OBSERVER: Dave Lowens CONSULTANT: Kelly Korth (OST) (NOTE - At least one of the members shall be from the PSA Group, at least one have held a SRO license or certiGeate at PSL) TOPICS REVIEWED
- 1. The purpose of the meeting was twofold: a review of proposed revision to the unavailability criteria for the SSC logic actuation systems at St Lucie, and to review the risk determination methodology for the 13 week schedule.
- 2. Mike Snyder provided a handout to panel members of the NUMARC guideline section pertaining to selection of performance criteria to start the discussion. The reason for revising the previously approved unavailability criteria for RPS, AFAS and ESFAS would be to refocus unavailability trending from plant level to a train based unavailability criterion. A written description and example of how this would be trended was handed out. The example was the U2 RPS, which included a period of unavailability m Modes 1-3 when TCB 5 failed to open during a surveillance test.
- 3. After a discussion, panel members agreed to the de6nition of trains for ESFAS and AFAS, and agreed that a clear identi6 cation of trains in the RPS was not possible. Therefore, performance monitoring would be appropriate at the system level However, panel members B. Hagar and J. Price disagreed with the unavailability hmit proposed for the RPS, citing that it was unduly overconservative. Therefore, the change to all logie system unavailability .
l criteria was rejected until further review was performed
- 4. The last item of discussion was regarding how risk assessment of equipment removal from service was to be performed. The panel members brie 0y reviewed the draft guideline for 13 week schedule planning. Brien Vincent, RJ Davis, and Bill Hagar described how risk assessment during the planning stages of equipment removal from service would be accomplished using the PREMRAS prepared by JPN Kelly Korth observed that there was a weakness in real time risk assessment in removing equipment from service, on the shift that started work in the plant. The panel could not agree on how to resolve this concern.
I i g,0 bV i l
@b
- . . .. .. - .- . .- . _ _ - _ - _ _ = - . _ - . . -- .. . - ..-. .
1 ACTION ITEMS 1
- 1. Mike Snyder to benchmark more thoroughly with other utilities on how they define .
unavailability for their logic actuation systems. (Completed 7/12/96, SONGS, Palisades, PTN, l l PECO)
- 2. Mike Snyder to discuss with IAC Engineering the proposed change to Performance Criteria for logic actuation systems. (Completed 7/13/96, Rod Filapeck) i l
l l 1 1 l i l 6
MAINTENANCE RULE EXPERT PANEL MEETING MLNUTES DATE: 9 July,1996 l CHAIRMAN: Mike Snyder MEMBERS: Joe Price (SCE) Brien Vincent (PSA) l Bill Hagar (SRO) 1 i (NOTE - At least one of the members shall be from the PSA Group, at least one have held a SRO license or certificate at PSL) l TOPICS REVIEWED l l 1. The purpose of the meeting was to review the second draft proposed revision to the l unavailability criteria for the SSC logic actuation systems at St. Lucie. 1
- 2. Mike Snyder provided a handout to panel members of the revised draft performance criteria to start the discussion. The reason for revising the previously approved unavailability criteria for RPS, AFAS and ESFAS would be to refocus unavailability trending from plant l level to a train based unavailability criterion. A wntten description and example of how this would be trended was handed out. The example was the U2 RPS, which included a period of l i i
l unavailability in Modes 1-3 when TCB 5 failed to open during a surveillance test. l l 3. Mike Snyder shared with panel members that prior to the meeting, Rod Filapeck of JPN ! I&C engineering was contacted for an opinion on the best method to monitor the health of the logic actuation systems. He agreed with the concept of unavailability monitoring on a train level for the AFAS and ESFAS systems, and agreed that it was not possible to identify more than one train for the RPS so system monitonng was satisfactory He did raise the concem that more specific monitoring was also necessary for the logic actuation systems, and agreed that reliability tracking for the measurement parameters would satisfy that concem. (Rod Filapeck was contacted in lieu of the system owner, since the system owner responsibility was l about to change due to reorganization)
- 4. A peer review of SONGS, PTN, Palisades and Limerick for how perfomance criteria was developed for logic actuation systems was shared with the panel members. These plant sites generally monitored unavailability on a 2 train level with the exception of Palisades, which used Plant Level Performance Criteria. The two sites with Eagle 21 RPS systems monitored on a 2 train level as well. The' limit for unavailability was generally more than 1%, appearing to be arbitrarily selected. The proposed PSL unavailability would be 0.6%, and based on Tech Spec LCO shutdown times since there is no corresponding hmit in the PSA.
- 5. The panel members agreed to accept the revised draft performance criteria for the logic actuation systems The revision to the first draft was that the RPS unavailability limit was
' raised from less than or equal to 6 up to 54 hours. to be consistent with AFAS and ESFAS.
I \ $
ACTION ITEMS
- 1. Bob Walcheski to write a PCR to ADM 17.08 to reflect the change in performance criteria for the logic actuation systems.
l l 1
MAINTENANCE RULE EXPERT PANEL MEETING WINUTES DATE: 9 August.1996 CHAlRMAN: Mike Snyder Ted Dillard SYSTEM OWNER: Roger Kulavich
-MEMBERS: t Brien Vincent (PSA) OBSERVER. Dave Wolf Roger Weller (SR0) CONSULTANT: Doug Weeks (NOTE - At least one of the members should be from the PSA Croup. at least one have held a ,
SR0 license or certificate at PSL) TOPICS REVIEWED
- 1. The purpose of the meeting was to confirm 'usmg the uppaded Mrule Procedure which now requires an expert panel approval) keepine :De EDCs gmernor iontrois in all) classification due to reliability problems Mike invder handed imt a copy of the pertinent NEl 93-01 guidance to panel members. and orrefit mghhghteii a :.anei members why the EDG governors were in all) status
- 2. Doug Weeks (ERT leader) handed out to the panel members the response to CR 96-1703 for the cause of the governor failure of the 2A2 EDG on 710i96. and discussed the circumstances. potential causes. and corrective actions
- 3. The panel then discussed if this condicon .w . hm tiona: ., .: e .nd with Roger Kulavich's technical perspective agreed that :t ".w a funcnona. odure A discussion of if the failure was mamtenance preventable folloud Doncaeek ::meated that the cause of the failure cou!c ce attributed to enher 8:te a: sende mainv .cr metices Therefore.
the panel and system owner agreed to consenanwa detera.. - n3 o be an MPff. The panel then compared this MPFF with the preuous EMPFF for zm-rnor faiiures. and determined that the 7 10 96 was n_ot an ret eat nerause t he 4..
., .wre differeat (lack of PM versus a procedural deficiency during a performam e of a W L Roger Kulavich pomted ou. to 'he one: .- ' G s .aW l :- 5:gmficantly o ;:01 A model This improved by the upgraded of the gosernor conuo!, from the . c,.
would have ehmmated the failure mode on 7 l0 % and pom. o:1 o her previous governor control failures except for one An mdustr:. unci miicated " . "ar- other sites had performed the upgrade. and that ali 8:tes w; a 'he do:A mode .r~ ausfied with its performance. The REA for 'he upgrade na- en "- -ed fm mac ~:ent renew and i approval
- 5. Ted Dillard expressed a concern re!atmg to um inch unran of u:- JA2 Liesel compared to the other sesen tesets -pe3r:.; "9 .o . . "- - -
- av ::a'.e t een causally related to the gmernor proriem ~ v i.e m . o o tu ?MC for iong term e M
l resolution. Specifically, pdm and Doug Week are working with MKW ESI to ascertain the cause of the high vibration.
- 6. In determining the Maintenance Rule classification of !be EDGs. Poger Kulavich requested that the Unit 2 EDGs remain in the a(1) classification for governor armance monitoring until 6/1/97. The goals would remain otherwise unchanged because discussion indicated that monitoring methods and trends were effective to predic future failures of a similar l nature, assuming the approval for installation of the 2301A governor controls. The Unit 1 EDG goals would remain unchanged. The Expert Panel unanimously agreed to this recommendation.
- 7. The last item that the panel discussed was the inability to perform a complete historical review of information during root cause analysis Earlier conversation m the meeting showed i
that failure data for the EDCs was retrieved only back to 1988. The reasons cited for this
~
l condition were that PW0s were previously writien by hand. and Ihat NPRDS does not provide data back to 1976. l ACTION ITEMS l 1. Doug Weeks will provide a written copy of the nL faiiure an.nois and procedural upgrades to ESI so that they may mcorpora'e hn3 !carned hom :h;s event. This action is ! important from the standpoint that the momtenante organaanmi tes; onsible for the shear pin overload could not be determined to be either FPL or ESI
- 2. Ted Dillard will find out who is responsible for equipment history to potentially aid in the development of a process for retrieving all relesant historical mformation l
t I i l
WAINTENANCE RUlf EXPERT PANEL WEETING WINUTES DATE: 27 August,1996 CHAIRMAN: Jeff West (SRO) MEMBERS: Ted Dillard Brien Vincent (PSA) Wike Snyder , (NOTE - At least'one of the members should be from the PSA Group. at least one have held a SR0 license or certificate at PSL) TOPICS REVIEWED i 1. The purpose _of the meeting was to review a proposal to meinde the Operations Support Building as a structure within the scope of the rule The potential need for inclusion was
- identified during the July QA audit, since metal facia from that buildmg blew off during an unusual onsite micro burst and contacted two phases of a Maui Transformer located directly l
across the roadway. The resulting Generator Lockout caused an automatic reactor trip. l l Wike Snyder handed out a copy of the Structures scoping doo. ment as prepared by Ed Hollowell (structures owner) to panel members, and briefly highhghted to panel the options l ' of: Include only the Ops support building since it has proximate location to the Unit 1 Main Transformers and has resulted in a unit trip. Include all onsite buildings as structures, and finally to not include the Ops support building which could be < onstrued as a deviation from the NEl 93-01 guidelines.
- 2. Although the system owner was not present at the meetms he was nearby should questions have arose on the proposal to include :he Ops suppor! M:iiding mto the scope of the rule.
1 The panel members agreed that although a similar esent wa ,uheh to recur. the conservative approach would be to includ.e the Ups .<upport bcmima m the scope of the maintenance rule considermg its proximate .ocatio:: to the tr,c. for:.ers This would require a basehne inspection and subsequen' :-rmda : H ons of in umport building by the l structures owner. 1 1 l ( ACTION ITEMS l
- 1. \hke Snyder will distribute the revised structurre 3copmc .e. imentation to Ed Hollowell and Expert Panel members for updating their Mam
- ::ance R ..e tandnooks.
l l l 1
_ _ _ . . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ __._-....._._____.._m . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . 2 L
- 1. There is no " updated" risk ranking lists. The original PSA i risk ranking input is provided by the attached calculations.
A PSA update has not yet been performed and, therefore, no ' i change in PSA input has been provided.
- 2. A PSA update has not.yet been completed (presently in '
progress). A response to an NRC RAI for the PSL RAI has been submitted to the NRC (I. assumed that they should know
- this).
- 4. This question is somewhat confusing. Since we scoped risk l significance by system, and only in few cases considered only certain components within a system risk significant, I would assume that the issue would be the MR systems included in the PSA but not considered risk significant. They are as
follows (the MR scoping document lists all non-risk significant systems (only around 30 total)):
- Main condensate (CST included with AFW)
- Turbine Cooling Water (backup cooling for "A" and "B" instrument air compressors in system 13 but are +
considered part of IA system for MR)
- Some HVAC (Unit 2 ICW pump enclosure)
- Some 480V swgr/bkrs (non-vital swgr)
- 6.9kV swgr e
I l l
MAINTENANCE RULE EXPERT PANEL MEETING MINUTES DATE: 7 June,1996 i CHAIRMAN: Mike Snyder f CONSULTANT: Gerry Crowley (JPN/CSI) MEMBERS: Jim Porter (SCE/ Systems) l Brien Vincent (PSA) CONSULTANT: Bud Elder (SCE/PM Basis) I CONSULTANT: Tom Krienberg (Contracts /Purch) Chuck Wood (SRO) CONSULTANT: Lee Rogers (DNE/ Services) (NOTE - At least one of the members should be from the PSA Group, SRO license or certificate at PSL.) TOPICS REVEWED
- 1. The purpose of the meeting was to complete the review dh and discussion of RCP seal failures from an earlier panel discussion on 24 May,1996 Mike Snyd meeting with a review of the first meeting's outcome and action items
- 2. Bud Elder provided results from bench marking against Millstone 2 and Wa plants with N9000 seals have the closest operating characteristics to S conditions for these sites essentially mirror PSL. They have not had operatin N9000 seals for six years.
Several options were
- 3. The RCP seal change out strategy was discussed with Gerry Crowley discussed, two each refueling, all four at once, all at once during the L' nit I mi These technicalissues will be resolved outside of the Expert Panel meeting process.
l
- 4. Cost consideraaons were discussed using dl a draft comparison d inventory costs of expenditure versus SU seals. The draft review indicated that the replacement sche u e anAfter were approximately the same for both seal types N9000 seals.
more precise figure for inventorv costs which showed S. All expert panel members agreed that the hN9000 seal has prosen to be li t opportunity the SU seals, and that the N9000 seals should be installed ili at St r d Lucie in 1995.at t e ear es to reduce the occurrence of seal failure, and to minimize unit unavailab ty as occu e
- 6. Considerable discussion was given to the need to place the RCP seals in NEI 93-01 was reviewed by the panel members. and different opinions w ere performance criteria of unit unavailability based on the next panel meeting on RCP seals
ACTION ITEMS
- 1. Gerry Crowley contacted Byron Jackson to determine what the vendor expected seal life of an SU model seal. The verbal answer provided was one operating cycle.
- 2. Bud Elder confirmed that the FSAR for PSL i & 2 was phrased as RCP seallife being AT LEAST 24 months.
- 3. Mike Snyder to check with Outage Management about the possibility of changing out all four RCP seals with N9000 seals during the mid cycle refueling ifRCP work is to be prohibited du the SG change out refueling .
- 4. The panel will convene once more to fmalize the decision on classifying the RCP seals into the a(1) status.
. . . . ~ . -. . . _ _ =. _..
MAINTENANCE RULE EXPERT PANEL MEETING MINUTES DATE: 7 June,1996 CHAIRMAN: Mike Snyder MEMBERS: Jim Poner (SCE/ Systems) CONSULTANT: Gerry Crowley (JPN/CSI) Brien Vmcent (PSA) CONSULTANT: Bud Elder (SCE/PM Basis) Chuck Wood (SRO) CONSULTANT: Tom Krienberg (Contracts /Purch) CONS: LTANT: Lee Rogers (DME/ Services) (NOTE - At least one of the members should be from the PSA Group, at least one have held a SRO license or certificate at PSI. ) TOPICS REVTEWED
- 1. The purpose of the meeting was to complete the review and discussion of the St. Lucie history of RCP seal failures from an earlier panel discussion on 24 May,1996 Mike Snyder started the meeting with a review of the first meeting's outcome and action items
- 2. Bud Elder provided results from bench marking against Millstone 2 and Waterford 3. (These plants with N9000 seals have the closest operating characteristics to St. Lucie) The operating conditions for these sites essentially mirror PSL. They have not had operating problems with N9000 seals for six years.
- 3. The RCP seal change out strategy was discussed with Gerry Crowley. Several options were discussed, two each refueling, all four at once, all at once during the Unit I mid cycle SG outage.
These technicalissues will be resolved outside of the Expert Panel meeting process. l l 4. Cost considerations were discussed using a draft comparison of expenditures of N9000 seals i versus SU seals. The draft review indicated that the replacement schedule and inventory costs l i were approximately the same for both seal types After the meeting, Tom Krienberg obtained a more precise figure for inventory costs which showed a clear cost advantage to the N9000 seals. l Lee Rogers was also able to help quantify the cost considerations for SU sealinventory costs. l S. All expert panel members agreed that the N9000 seal has proven to be superior in reliability to the SU seals, and that the N9000 seals should be installed at St. Lucie at the earliest opportunity to reduce the occurrence of seal failure, and to minimize unit unas ailability as occured in 1995..
- 6. Considerable discussion was given to the need to place the RCP seals in a(1) classifien: ion.
} NEI 93 01 was reviewed by the panel members. and ditTerent opinions were explored. The peiformance criteria of unit unavailability based on FPL Nuclear Disision goals was briefly discussed. Since consensus was not achieved by the panel members. this will be the focal point of
- the next panel meeting on RCP seals
l l ACTION ITEMS I
- 1. Geny Crowley contacted Byron Jackson to determine what the vendor expected seal life of an I
SU model seal. The verbal answer provided was one operating cycle.
- 2. Bud Elder confirmed that the FSAR for PSL 1 & 2 was phrased as RCP seallife being AT LEAST 24 months.
- 3. Mike Snyder to check with Outage Management about the possibility of changing out all four RCP seals with N9000 seals during the mid cycle refueling if RCP work is to be prohibited during i l
! the SG change out refueling . J
- 4. The panel will convene once more to finalize the decision on classifying the RCP seals into the i I
a(1) status.
McAl form Version: 0 l s ( l Co rrective Actio n Form
- l PMAl Site:ESL i Source l Nurnber: PM9643-526 Document. WALCHESK! PMAI REO Originator.SCE Due Date: 3/29/96 )
1 Assigned Deptartment: SCE SCE/ MILTON Q j j Implementor Name Unit Outage Mode SNO NCR OWA ' J i Deectlption:AS A MAINT. RULE IMPLEMENTATION ACTMTY. A 3 YR HISTORICAL REVIEW OF SSC'S WITHIN THE ' SCOPE OF THE MAINT. RULE WAS PERFORMED TO ID POTENTIAL FUNCTIONAL FAILURES. NPRDS/ PASSPORT DATA REQUIRES FURTHER EVAL; REVIEW AND 10 MAINTENANCE PREVENTABLE FUNCTIONAL FAILURES CASES; UST OCCURENCES ON, OR ATTACH TO SSC l PERFORMANCE INDICATOR. EXJGUIDANCE ATTACHED. ICW.lO ANY REPEAT MPFF'tySAME CAUSE) OCCUR. REVIEW RESULTS WITH SSC PERFORMANCE PDfTEDIA H" AMY D(* IC CYr ECMCM f'AAADe C"Tr Ctn A { Acceptance Section Status / Comments: ! I understand and accept responsitety of the above listed adson and due date . l Department Managar Signature l Due Date t-xtenstorvTransfer Responsibility Requests l Appvd By Extend To Date Roquest by /Date supervoor/Date Ongsnator/Date Manager /Date Appvd By extena io vate Moquest oy Ivate supervoor/pate ungmatorivate Manager /uste ! Reasons: Appvd By M LM Resp. To Request by / Data Supervoor/Date Manager /Date Roopent/Date Reasons: j Gompletion Sectionl Comp 6etion Date: JMf '* Close4ut Documents: Comments: No /KWS H S MW i i l A . ! Comp 6eted By: I"4 W b?W / . W - Date: ' Revewed By: Osc#I 6 /C / d Date: Y2 k Approved By: I d F # Date: 'P 9 6 Re_.d ,,; l2d~ck1ALv w= va,.. s h a. u i 56 l h
-_ _ . . . _ . . ~ __ - - . - . - . - - __ . . _ . . ._ .. _.. . _ = . -
. i 4
. Nucteer Plant R:llability D ts Systen General Report For; ferry K. Mitter Report Id MPtG00AA Florida Power & Light Company Job haber: 7314 Run Date: 02/23/96 Rim Time: 15:33
Introduction:
Th3 attached report was generated by your gaery of the NPRDS data base. A summary of your cpery is listed below. QUERY: You s*Lected the following search condition (s): Find Failure Discovery Dates that are after 01/01/93 m Selected System is Muclear Service Water CE Selected Unit ID is ST LUCIW Thire wered34 records meeting the search condition (s). DISPLAY AND SORT: You s3lected to run general report 4 Component Failure Brief Report You chose to sort the report by: Sort l SegJence Field Name l 1 Unit 10 value 2 Utility Component 10 3 Failure Discovery Datedf gothic 9 type (letter gothic 09 medita) codepece tid)bese l Of gothic 9 )
- , .~ , . . - - .- -
Nuclear Plant R;tlability Date Systen a Fellur3 3riSf Report R m Dets: 02/23/96 98G04AA Job Muser: 7318 Sys Unit 10 v tue, utility Component 10, Fellurs Olscovery 0:ta e Jnit_ , Comp. _UtiL ity Component Id,,,,, _0etes _ _ Norratives 00: 02/24/9h Desc: WHILE TME PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER , AN Ault!LIARY
$1 ICNTRL P/P 14 ,4A 10: 03/30/93 OPERATOR ON RGITINE PATROL REPORTED TMAT TME OUTPUT AIR LINE OF P /
Appla . P 14 4A ( CONTROLLER FOR TCV 14*4A ' TEMPERATURE CONTROL VALVE FOR CIRCULATING WTER TO THE CCW' (COMPONENT COOLING WATER) NEAT EXCNANGER j Dese: j
) WAS BROKEN AaB TCV 14 4A COULD NOT NAVE RESPONDED TO ITS NEXT 00We Funes ( FAILED GPEll ) . TMIS DEGRADED 1 0F 2 TRAINS OF CCW AS TE Deses
- Cause RATE AT hRitCN IT l5 SEING COOLED WAS NO Lum-n weinuuse . NO EFFECT ON PLAalf . CAUEE OF BROKEN tiA LINE ( PIECE Pani i n E ,
rfra 3045 Bailey Controls Olv/Fraty Bailey Meter ~PostleLY IRE To ammammar STRESS , LOCAL AREA VIBRATION OR AGING . Action: TME AIR LINE WAS REPLACED , TCV 14 4A WAS TESTED AND RETURNED TO rod Nue: 5321030 mod Id: 50 532 NORMAL . ( Wof93006220 ) Tot System: WAC -%ucteer Service Water CE Utt Sys: ICV b e,MM f*L44 t M* I" MU b# ! FPLSLS1 VALVE SR 21 1A 00 04/22/93 Deses DURING A MAINTENANCE INSERVICE TEST OF TN 1A COMPONENT COOLING 10: 06/28/93 WATER NEAT EXCMANGER , TUBE SIDE SAFETT RELIEF VALVE ( SA 21 1A ) Appt: LIFTED LATE OLRING A BENCN FLOW TEST . THERE WH No rFfeet au fus Desc: SYSTEM DUE TO TMF ttff Ptf$$UEF RFfMr. tfr.MaffrAMTIY itus8 faam THE
~
ALLCWASLE OF TNE PIPING . Func Causes SETPolNT ORIFT MAY MAVE OCCURRED DUE To CORRoslod A2 DEBRIS ON THE RELIEF VALVE INTEthAL COIPONENTS , THIS CAUSES A SilCING OR oste: 8:fra 7095 Tetodyne
- Ferris Eng Y
/
SURF ACE 80@ LNG SETWEEN THE SEAT ANO DISC ASSEMSLY . Action: A NEW VALVE WAS INSTALLED , UPON BENCN TESTING AW ADJUSTENTS . Mod Mus: 573E 350 ( PWo 892051663 / 20 ) Mod Id: rstem: WAC Nucteer Service Water *CE Utl Sys: ICW FPLSLS1 CET82K 20207 00: 05/2~,/93 Desc WHILE THE. PLANT WAS SIGJTOOWN FOR A REFUELING CtJTAGE AND WHILE 10: 07/14/93 CONTROL ROOM PERSONNEL WRE ATTEMPTING TO STOP THE 1A ICW ( INTAKE F.ppl: SwuMOCK COOLING WATER ) PtteP IT WAS REPORTED TNAT IT WOULO NOT SMUT OFF ( Desc *Nuc Sev Water Puup Notor Cktbrk CONTINUED TO RUM ) . NO EFFECT ON SYSTEM OR. PLANT . Cause: TROUBLES #00 TING REVEALED TNAT TMERE WAS A MISTERMINATED WIRE ON A Fwer MOC ( POTOR OPERATED CONTACT ) ( PIECE PART ) INSIDE TME CIRCulf Osses kf SREAKER *:UBICAL 20207 ( CIRCulf 3REAKER FOR 1A ICW Pur MOTOR ) . TNIS MISTERMINiTED WIRE PREVENTED TME BREAKER FROM OPENING . CAUSE Of c:fr: W120
- Westinghouse Elec Corp / Magen MISTERMINAT 0N IS UNeuschal . POSSIBLY DUE TO PREVIOUS 14AINTENANCE .
d OJe: 50 DNP 250 Action: THE WIRE WAS CORRECTLY RETERM! DATED . CIRCUIT BREAKER 20207 As TME 1A CCW Pup WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL , ( Wuf93014858 ) mod Id: 500NP250 TKM System: WAC -Nuclear Service Water CE Utt Sys: ICW g
kuclect Plant taliebility Data system General Repart Report Id: mPAG00AA For: Terry E. Mitter Job Wusters 7316 Floride Power & Light Company km Dates 02/23/96
- Run Time: 15:30 Int rodJction:
The attached report was generated by your query of the WPROS data base. A summary of your cyaery is listed below. outtY: I Vou selected the following search condittoir t): 1 Find failure Discovery Dates that are after 01/01/93 Selected Unit 10 is ST. LUCl @ Selected system is Nuclear service Water CE There wereR fecords meeting the search Condition (s). DISPLAY AMD $0RT: You selected to rm general report 4 Component failure trief Report You chose to sort the report try: Sort Sequence Field Name 1 Unit 10 = value 2 Utility component ID 3 Failure Disccwory Datedf gothic 9 type (letter gothic 09 medium) codepage tid 0 base Of gothic 9 l
. .- - ~. .. .
Nrac04AA Nuctscr Plant 43tiablLity Orts System Fellure trisf Report Rm 02te: 02/23/96 r l By: Unit 10 - v:Lue, Utility Component 10, Falture Discovery Osts Job Muutzer: 7316
, Uni t_ . Comp. , Utility Compmnent Id _ .,,,,0 e t es Narratives '
SLS2 VALVE TCV 14 48 00: 05/01/95 Dese WNILE TK PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER AS OURI 10: 02/01/96 TIME TEST OF TCV-14 48 ( TEMPERATURE CONTROL VALVE FOR CCW (Caprt3IENT Appli . l 01sca C00Ll#G WATER) EAT EXCNANGER 2s OUTLET ) IT WS OlsCOVERED T STROKE file EXCE00ED ITS MAXitst ALLOWASLE TIME 08 60 SEcces >305 Fmc TNIS DEGRADED 10F 2 TRAINS OF CCW . THERE WAS No EFFECT ON T ! Otscs Cause THE VALVE DE$1GN REQUIRES THAT TEFLON KARING SURFACES BE Mir: P140 Pratt , Henry to MAINTAINED IN 00tB CDeelTIGs FOR EAM OF VALVE OPERATIGI . TEFLON SURFACES IN PGA Cos!TICII HSULTED FROM SNAFT CARTRIE SEAL 0-RING Nod rum: 30**-1100 NUCLEAR Mod Id: 1100 FAILURE TO KEEP PROCESS SALT WATER FROM ENTERING TEFlcll BEARING AR j AW FROM SNAFT WEAR ON TNE TEFLON . l System: WAC Actions A NEW VALVE WAS INSTALLED . TCV 14 48 WAS TESTED Am RETURNED To Nuclear Service Water CE NORMAL , TNE PM ( PREVENTITIVE MAINTEh ANCE ) FREQUENCT WAS INCERASED Utl Sys: ICW AND THE PM SCOPE WAS ALSO ENNANCED TO 680RE ADEQUATELT ADDRESS TNE ENyl0RMENTAL CON 0!TIONS . ( Wo895032001 ) ( Wo894013425 ) (
$ TAR #950764 ) ( siAR#950015 ) T04 M} %\ , AJef- NdouC /MfM FPLSL12 RELAY 4/832 00: 11/05/93 Dese: DURING A MONTHLT SURviELLANCE OF THE INTAKE COOLING WTER PUEP .
10: 01/19/94 THE PtAIP nCULD NOT START . THERE WAS Loss OF TRA1N . No EFFECT ON THE Appl: PLANT , Dese: Cause: TROUBLESN00 TING R[VEALED THAT THE RELAY ( PIECE PART ) AND TNE START CIRCulf WOULO NOT LATCM IN . CAU$E IS UNKNOWI POS$1BLET DUE TO Func AGING . 02:ct Action: A SNIM WAS A00ED To INSURE TNAT TNE RELAT WOULD LATCM IN . TWE INTAKE COOLING WATER PLSEP AE TNE RELAT WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO c;fr: G060 General Electric Company SERVICE . ( W r93029968 ) SSC
'od Must 12NFA154E22N (mgg;, fg,qyJG - nor- MA. WMWW System: WAC Mucteer Service Water CE Utl Sys: ICW l
1 t l
0
\
1.0 INTRODUCTION
impleinentation of the NRC Maintenance Rule, in accordance with NUMARC 93-01,
" Industry Guideline for Monitonng the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants," requires events having an irnpect on systems within scope be evaluated to determine if they are Maintenance Preventable Funcbonal Failures (MPFFs). The )
following methodology provides guidance to be used when making MPFF decisions. Figure 1 is provided to assist in MPFF determinations. The intent is that the MPFF decision making process use the basic causes found on Figure 1 to determine is a i j Functional Failure is maintenance preventable. Figure 1 was developed to be consistent with the Event Casual Factor Categories found in Appendix A of INPO Good Practice OE-907," Root Cause Analysis." ;
- j 2.0 MPFF Determination Guidelines ;
1 FUNCTIONAL FAILURES I A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not capable of performing its intended funcbon. Intended function is defined as ..the funcbon(s) performed by the SSC,as hsted in the MR, that required its inclusion within the scope of the rule. For SSC's that have Plant Level Performance Criteria such as SCRAMS, the intended function is to not cause a SCRAM. Failure that results in an event covered under a Plant Level, such as Unplanned Safety System Actuation, would be a functional failure. Loss of funcbon can be either direct, i.e., the SSC that performs the funcbon fails to perform its i intended funcbon or indirect, i.e., the SSC fails to perform its intended funcbon as a result of another SSC (safety related or non-safety related). If a funcbonal failure recurs during post maintenance testing but before retuming the SSC's to l service, it could be indicative of unacceptable correchve acbons but is not considered another functional failure, Intended function is further defined as a demand function or run function. A conscious decision to make a funcbon unavailable is not normally a funcDonal failure. Failure to meet a Technical Specification is not automatically a loss of funcbon. An evaluation l of the event may find that system design criterion was met even though the TS acceptance enteria was not. i l
P Fail $re during a test must be evaluated to determne if the same would have occurred dunng a true demand or in absence of the test condibons. If so, the failure is a functional failure. Failure of a redundant component is considered a funcbonal failure if the component is 1 of 2, or requires 2 of 3 comodence. MAINTENANCE PREVENTABLE A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not capable of performing its intended funcbon and should have been orevented by the oerformance of maintenance actions by the utility. The cause of the failure is attnbuted to a maintenance-related activity. Maintenance includes not only those actmbes traditionally associated with identifying and correcting actual or potentially degraded conditions, i.e., repair, surveillance, diagnostic examinations, and preventive measures, but extends to all supporting functions for the conduct of these activities. Examoles of Maintenance Preventable:
-Implementation of incorrect maintenance procedures.
Incorrect implementation of correct maintenance procedures.
-Incorrect implementation of maintenance pe Tormed without procedures considered within the j skill of the craft.
I
-Failures as previously documented 'by Operating Experience that could have been produded by an appropnate and timely maintenance actmty.
Failure to perform maintenance actmbes that are normal and appropriate to the equipment funt: tion and importance. Examples that are not Maintenance Preventable:
-Initial failures due to OEM design and manufacturing including initial electronic piece part earty failures. -Initial failures due to design inadequacies in selecting or applying commercial or "off the shelf' designed equipment. -Initial failures due to inherent material defects. -Operational errors and extemal or initatmg events. -Intentional run to failure.
Correcbve maintenance based on the Pass / Fail of a . surveillance test is not considered a l MPFF unless the equipment could not have performed its funcbon, e.g., check valve leak rate l
__ _ .. .. . _ . . _ . . _ _ _ . . . . _ . _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ . _ . - _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . 4 i I 4 test. kithough the component has exceeded a defined condition, maintenance is only perfonned once that condition is exceeded i f Components bemg out of specification (e.g. breaker trip times) is not considered a MPFF j unless the equipmen2 could not have performed its funcbon. i l Packing leakage is not a MPFF unless the equipment could not perform its function. Minor leaks will be consedered MPFF's if the valve funcbon is to prevent radio 6ogical releases. j Functional failure of a component that can be demonstrated to be a first time event (plant and j industry) and the plant had no reasonable way of expecung an occurrence (vendor manual or i related experience), will not be tallied as an MPFF against a Performance Criterion. However, j it will be tallied as part of the repeat MPFF count. , 1 i Refer to Figure 1, MPFF Program Areas and Basic Causes, for the determination of j Maintenance Preventable based on functional failure basic cause. 1 i i 3 i . } l 1 1 l 1 1 I i a
1 4 ! e 12 k' m ..g ,.1 ,a e
, 1g ] ifi ,
f j luit 1,[ lll ,o 11: 1
,.1
[.u .
\. -
1 > L_, a 'l g , t. l
- i
" } ,
int ili p.la 1 . i 1 _ ,1, 2a i ' 1, t . a Of f cS I, I p j{lk[ t,k 3 ht . 1 I g i I t 'i'l s Ij !E '-- l ' i jh ,llt i o . i t i {t' ^ l-j i lt j ,ppl n4 'P 4 'M B! m< ;p e..1.kilebb il _ 16i{ i Ig !ic E I I i i 1 11, - 1
?
1 iji . .1 t 3 ..,. , i,.i M h i;ll 3L - I l','
,lI Je ;l c. w e l .y ?, .
w t' i t,I d
,g,<
j J j 2 j <l 8 i 4l<uiti<j{
. .I 1, < h. .,i r
- p i, q.,:,u!llui .i si
frGuPE Ytt) O' LCXA - - nt PL E
- i j SSC PEREORMANCE INDICATOR sy i
- t SSC: 96 - Auxiliary Feedwater Status:(a)(2) Updated: 14 PAarch,1996
! l 1 Perfomi4Dee Monitorina Period: Previous 12 months for OOS hrs & LERs,36 months for all others. l ) Performance Criteria: l Unavailability: U1& U2 <88 hrs /yr per A&B train,168 hrs /yr per C train (OOS hrs - 12 rnonth period) ; Reliability: 51 Repetative MPFFs, and 52 unrelated MPFFs per train,36 month period. l PLPC 3: si unplanned and LER reportable ESF actuations last 12 months. (Exludes AFAS) { ! UNAVAILABILITY: \ l 1 i I l J'
- e w
w .:.a .? e
~ :. t+>
- a. y +
= ..
~ ~
l ,,y , < h y .-c ~ - i l l REALIABILITY: List all train failures, correctNe actions and MPFFs (attach ADM 17.08 Figs, STARS, etc.) 2C AFWtrain 2/27/93 - SE-09-4 grounded by water intrusion, valve may not have stroked dunng valKI demand. 3/13/96 - SE-09-4 failure to open during surveillance testing. Cause due to intermittent keyswitch fault. (Root Cause Report SCE 96-10) 11/6/95 - MV-09 Broken torque switch discovered during testing. Possible MPFF. 9/20/95 - MV-08-3 trip hook and latching lever indicated excesswe wear causing a tnp of the mech over speed tnp mechanism. Loss of 1 of 3 trains AFW. Cause appears to be normal wear. Possible MPFF 9/15/95 - CKT BKR 60903 for MV-08-13 shorted due to water intrusion causing loss of 1 of 3 trains of AFW. l Switch was replaced, new gasket installed on junction door. Possible MPFF. l 2A AFW train 3/1/94 - 2A AFW motor breaker would not close due to broken cottor pin. Possible MPFF PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE CRITERIA: 0 Unplanned LER reportable ESF actuabons for the past 3 years Trends: 28 AFW-(35.8 hrs unavail. Aug 95) caused Q3 95 spike. 2C AFW -(51.5 hrs unavail. Sep 95 due to correctwe maintenance) reason for Q3 95 spike. 4 functional failures (not all maintenance preventable) on C AFW train in past 3 years. Recent anolicable Industry Information: INPO SER 4-95, " Terry Turbine Govemor (Woodward) Valve Stem Binding *
-wp----,,-- w + - - _ _ _ _ _ . _ . - - - - - _ _ _ - - _ * - -
RewSRM5T 2 PROCEDumRifMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAGE: THE MAINTENANCE RULE 30 of 36 i ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
" d6D"N.7)B ST. LUCIE PLANT
. FIGURE 4 (Page 1 of 2)
Goal Setting and Monitoring , Unit: 1 2 Date: Risk Significant: 0 Yes o No I SSC: Reason for Goal Setting: Performance Criteria Not Met . Which criteria were not met? 4 Description of Events: 4 Repetitive MPFF (attach Figure 3 for each failure) Explain how failures are repetitive. Were previous corrective actions inadequate? i References (attach): Does this SSC require (a)(1) status? O Yes o No System Owner Yes - signature of Expert Panel Mernber Maintenance Rule Coordinator No - signature and reason why not Expert Panel Chairman
I .
' REvlDRAET 2 POOCEDUMtEMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAGE:
THE MAINTENANCE RULE 31 of 36
, ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE l
~
"" EO.l)B ST. LUCIE PLANT
. FIGURE 4 (Page 2 of 2)
Goal Setting snd Monitoring (continued) L Root Cause Analysis: Assigned to: l l l Corrective Actions and Responsibilities: Assigned to: . 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 1 i ! Goal Setting and Monitoring: For each corrective action, there should be a goal l l to be attained that shows the action was correct, monitoring for a follow;up l period to verify success, and a discussion to show how PSA and industrywide I operating experience were used in the process. l Goal Monitoring method & frequency Date PSA/ Industry Exp i
- 1. 1.
l
- 2. 2. ,
- 3. 3.
l
- 4. 4.
l Prepared by: System Owner Date Review and Concurrence:
' Maintenance Rule Coordinator Date i
Review and Approved: Expert Panel Chairman Date l l l
Phial Form Version: O Corrective Action Form 6 PMAl Site:ESL Source Number: 2M9&D3-526 Document: WALCHESK! PMAl REOOriginator:SCE Due Date: 3/29/96 Assigned Deptar mnt: SCE SCEMILTON Q
'c;E. .e Name Unit Outoge Mode SNONCR OWA Descr4Wlon:AS A MAINT. RULE IMPLEMENTATION ACTMTY, A 3 YR HISTORICAL REVIEW OF SSC*S Wr1HIN THE SCOPE OF THE MAlpK. RULE WAS PERFORMED TO ID POTENTIAL FUNCTIONAL FAILURES.
NPRD$lPAS8 PORT DATA REQUIRES FURTHER EVAL; REVIEW AND D MAINTENANCE PREVENTABLE FUNCTIONAL FAILURES CASES: LIST OCCURENCES ON, OR ATTACH TO SSC PEPFORMANCE INDICATOR. EXJOUIDANCE ATTACHED. ICW.ID f*DrfEDIAANY 117REPEAT AMV Dr*MPFF'SjSAME tC Citf' EfWrt PauDe CAUSE) CTEOCCUR. gla J REVIEW RESULTS WITH SSC PERFORMANCE l Acceptance %2-Xi Status / Comments / I understand and accept responsitely of the above listed action and due date - Department Manager Signature l Due Date Extenserviransrer Responsibthty Requests l Appvd By Extend To Date Request by /Date supervisor /Date ongmator/Date Manager /Dete turieno io vase Meques'4W supervoouvate ungsnatortuate manager /vate Reasons: Appvd By XFER Resp. To Request Dy /Date supervisor /Date Manager /Date Roopent/Date Reasons: [ Completion 56ciavnl Completson Date: Close4ut Documents: Comments: l l
. Completed By- I Date:
Revewed By: I Date: Approved By: / Date: Reviewed By- / Date: I
g PRAAI Form Version: 0 Corrective Action Form l1 l PtRAI Site:2SL Source Number: PM96 03-527 Document:W6LGdEElu.f5delBEQOriginator.3CE Due Date: 3/29/96 Aseigned l Depterenent: SCE SCE/SWIATEK Q knpiemonter Nanw Unit Outage teode SNO NCR OWA
Description:
AS A MAINT.RUI.E IMPLEMENTATION ACTMTY, A 3 YR HISTORICAL REMEW OF SSC'S WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE MAINT. RULE WAS PERFORMED TO 10 POTENTIAL FUNCTIONAL FAILURES. - NPRDSFASSPORT DATA REOUIRES FURTHER EVAL; REVIEW AND 10 MAINTENANCE ! PREVENTABLE FUNCTIONAL FAILURES CASES; UST OCCURENCES ON, OR ATTACH TO SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR. EXJGUIDANCE ATTACHED. WM Nr- rrw a d cNnamoi rte ] l Acceptance seccon Status /Commente I understand and accept resporately of the above listed action and due date Department Manager Signature j oue Date e.xtension/ Transfer ResponsiDellty Requests l Appvd By Extend To Date Request Dy / Dele Supenneor/Date Dngenator/Date Manager /Date N6 supervisorruote vnginatorivate - w iivme , i I Reasons. ; Appvd By I n t:K Resp. To Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Manager /Date Recapsent/Date Reasons: l Completion Section j Completion Date: _1 /s t, /q (, Close-Out Documents: Comments
- Cus r 'n .,LQ ,u p [o at n ty hat /71Pf6 i
G 1 1 e i CompWed By: /. i A cDEM Date: d 7/ M Z j -- 7 , Reviewed By- 4M[ / S~f 8 # Ib"
- Date: 3 !2 b Approved By- # / N8 " Date:
Revewed By: /56 Date: M@ l. u h ! o$
s e i EPRG0(AA* Nucteer Plant R2ttability D ts System Failuro selef Report Rm Det;: 02/23/96 By: Unit ID v:Lue, Utt tity Component ID, Psiluro Discovery DIts Job N wber 7327 i / nit _ .Cosp, Utility Cceponent Id _ _ Dates Narratives
#1 $1 VALV0P FCV 07 1A 00: 01/19/93 Dese: w!LE TNE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER AND CONTROL ROOM 10: 05/14/93 PERSONNEL WERE COWUCTING A QUARTERLY SURVEILLANCE TEST OF FCV 07-1A (
Appt: CSCTNOVAVO FLOW CONTROL VALVE FOR CONTAINMENT,$ PRAY.NEADER ) IT MS REPORTED TMAT Desca *Catent sprey Disch To Ndr Isot Valvop IT WOULD NOT CLOSE COMPLETLY . flits DEGRADED 1 F 2 TRAINS OF CONTAllNENT SPRAT DUE TO TME L TY TO CONTROL FLOW . WO Fmc: EFFECT ON PLANT . Discs Causes TROLSLESN00 TING REVEALED TMAT A SOLENotD ( PIECE PART ) ON TNE f VALVE OPERATOR WAS DEFECTIVE AND COULD NOT BE REPA! RED . CAUSE UNOOWN l
%fra W255 Wlot Div / ACF Ind Inc , POSSIBLY DLE To AGING .
Kod Nue: 1309-SAF T GUARD Actions A NEW SOLEN 0!D ( LIE FOR LIE ) WAS INSTALLED . FCV 071A WAS l Mod Ic: TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Wo#93010347 ) ( Wof93002073 ) TEM I 1 System: SCD Contairunent Spray-CE i utt Sys: CSS , l PLSLS1 V*LVE FCV 071 A Dos 06/11/95 Desc: WHILE THE PL ANT WAS SMUTDGjN , AS A PRECAUTION FOR NURRICANE ERIN ID: 10/13/95 , AND DdlNG A SURVE!LLANCE TEST OF FCV 071A ( FLOW CONTROL VALVE FOR Appi: CSCTNOVA TME CONTAINMENT SPRAY MEADER ) IT WAS DISCOVERED TNAT THE CLOSE STROE i Desc: 'Cntant spray Disch' To Nde Isot Velve TIME WAS TOO SLOW ( 20 SEC VS 8 SEC ) . THE FAIL SAFE COICITION FOR
, TNIS VALVE IS FAILED QPEN . THERE WAS NO EFFECT ON THE SYSTEM . THERE Fmc ij WAS NO IISEEDIATED EFFECT ON THE PLANT SUT SL2 SEQUENT OPERATION OF THE DIse PLANT YIELDED AN INADVERTENT CONTAINMENT SPRAY ACCUATION DUE TO A
'V MISSED COORJNICAtl0N TNAT TNis VALVE WAS FAILED OPEN . TROUBLESN00 TING Mfra A032 ACF Ind Inc REVEALED OVERCOMPRESSION OF THE ELASTOMERIC 0-RINGS CONTAINED WITNIN i r.ed Num: SAF T-SEAL /RS219265 TME FACES OF THE SEAT RINGS .
Mod Id Cause: DISASSEMBLY REVEALED At DfPECf!VE 0-3Diti CAUSING THE VALVE TO BINO
. SUSPECT AGING , FATIGUE OF THE 0-RING .
em: SCD -Containment spray-CE Action: TME VALVE STEM AND PISTON WERE CLEANED AND INSPECTED . TME u.. Sys: CSS 0-RINGS WRE REPLACED . TME VALVE WAS TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WO95022599 ) ( LER 95007 ) TKM 1 l l i l l l r P l 1 i I ! l l l l i l i ! I l 1 , 4
', )
4pk004AA- Nucteer Plant R2tiability 0:t2 System - Psiture Selef Report Rm 0;ts: 02/Z3/96 ' By: Unit 10 v:Lue, Utility Component 10, Feltura Discovery 0:t2 Job Ihaber: 7325 Jnit_ .C omp,, ,,,,Utili ty Component Id,_ , Dates Narratives . stets 2 VALVE FCV 07 1A 00: 04/06/94 Deses WITN TNE UNIT OFF LINE , DURING A SURVEILLANCE TEST , CONTA!INENT 10: 12/06/94 SPRAY MEADER 'A' FLOW CONTROL VALVE _( E V 0Z-1A._) WOULD NOT QPEN ON appts CSCTICVA DDIAle . ALTMOUGN THE SYSTQ'STTLL ABLE70 9J5RITS INTEWED Desc 'Critant Spray Disch To Nde Isol valve FUNCTION , THE FAILURE WAS CtzsSTDERED-A u Ur 3 RAIN WITN NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . Func: Cause TNE CAUSE OF FAILURE tdAS F0Las TO BE BlWING OF TW WDGE & SEAT Desc
+
/ ASSD SLY DLE TO A PREVIOUS INCORRECT REPAIR . THE WEDGE idAS INSTALLED 180 DEGREES CLJT . ALSO 2 PISTON RINGS WRE INSTALLED GPPOSITE OF THE
, 7 TECN MANUAL DIRECT 10NS .
Kfra W255 WM Div / ACF Ind Ig \ Actions LPON CLEANING TNE SEAT RIIIGS , TNE WDE WAS RE INSTALLED 4od Ilum: C3 l Mod Id CORRECTLY . TIIE PISTON Ale 808 RINGS WRE INSTALLED Als TIE VALVE WILS I REPACED Ale TESTED . PWof88023043 , 94007952 System: SCD -Containment spray-CE Jtt Sys: CSS
*LSLS2 VALVE SE 07 4 Dos 03/06/93 Dese WWILE THE PLANT WAS $NUTDOWN ,.FOR OTHER MAINTENANCE CONCERNS ,
ID: 04/06/93 CONTROL ROOM PERSONNEL REPORTED TMAT WHEN ATTEMPTING TO OPEW SE 07 4 ( Appl SOLENOID VALVE FOR REACTOR (RX) CAVITY @ REclRC ) ( tailfl2ED ) Deses IT GROJNDED QUT Alc THERE WAS A FLASN FROM THE MAND SWITCN . THE VALVE DID WOT OPEN . THERE WAS NO EFFECT ON THE CONTAINMENT SPRAY SYSTEM . 7 Fmc: Descs pa
q" No EFFECT ON K?"? .
cause: TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED TNAT A WIRE IN A LOCAL JUNCT!0N 90K TMAT kV' SUPPLIES POWR To SE 07 4 WAS $NORTING To GROUND . CAUSE UNKNOWN , Efra Vo30 Valcor Enos Corp POSSIBLY DUE TO PREVIOUS MAINTEIIANCE . tod Num V526 6064 10 Actions TNE WIRE WAS RELUGED . SE 07 4 WAS TESTED AND RETURNED To le0RMAL Nod it: . ( Wof93007757 ) ( Wof93008161 ) TKM
*em: SCD -Contairment spray-CE
- s. tyss CSS 9
4 . 4 o
- j. /
l 4
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Implementation of the NRC Maintenance Rule, in accordance with NUMARC 9341,
" Industry Guideline for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Ma i ntenance at Nuclear Power Plants," requires events having an impact on systems within scope be evaluated to determine if they are Maintenance Preventable Funchonal Failures (MPFFs). The following methodology provides guidance to be used when making MPFF decisions Figure 1 is provided to assist in MPFF determinations. The intent is that the MPFF decision making process use the basic causes found on Figure 1 to determine is a Functional Failure is maintenance preventable. Figure 1 was developed to be consistent with the Event Casual Factor Categories found in Appendix A of INPO Good Practice uti-f'07," Root Cause Analysis."
2.0 MPFF Determination Guidelines FUNCTIONAL FAILURES j i A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC withm the scope of the rule is not capable of performing its intended funcbon Intended funcbon is defined as ..the funcbon(s) performed by the SSC,as listed in the MR, that required its inclusion within the scope of the rule. For SSC's that have Plant Level Performance Criteria such as SCRAMS, the intended function is to not cause a SCRAM. Failure tnat results in an event covered under a Plant Level, such as Unplanned Safety System Actuation, would be a functional failure. Loss of function can be either direct, i.e., the SSC that performs the funcbon fails to perform its intended funcbon or indirect, i.e., the SSC fails to perform its intended funcbon as a result of l
.another SSC (safety related or non-safety related),
if a functional failure recurs during post maintenance testing but before retuming the SSC's to service, it could be indicative of unacceptable correchve actions but is not considered another functional failure. Intended function is further defined as a demand function or run function. A consoous decision to make a function unavailable is not normally a funcbonal failure. Failure to meet a Technical Specificabon is not automabcally a loss of funcbon. An evaluation of the event may find that system design criterion was met even though the TS acceptance enteria was not.
i I Failure during a test must be evaluated to determine if the same would have occurred during a true demand or in absence of the test conditions. If so, the failure is a functional failure. Failure of a redundant component is considered a funchonal failure if the component is 1 of 2, or requires 2 of 3 coinodence MAINTENANCE PREVENTABLE A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not capable of performing its intended funcbon and should have been orevented by the > l oerformance of maintenance actions by the utility. l The cause of the failure is attributed to a maintenance-related activity. Maintenance includes not w.'y those actmtses traditionally associated with identifying and correcting actual or potentially degraded conditions, i.e., repair, surveillance, diagnostic examinations, and preventive measures, but extends to all supporting functions for the conduct l of these actmbes. l l 9amples of Maintenance Preventable:
-Implementation of incorrect maintenance procedures.
-Incorrect implementation of correct maintenance procedures.
l -Incorrect implementation cf maintanance performed without procedures considered vathin the skill of the craft.
-Failures as previously documented by Operating Experience that could have been precluded ,
by an appropriate and timely maintenance activity.
-Failure to perform maintenance activities that are normal and appropriate to the equipment function and importance.
* }
t Examples that are not Maintenance Preventable:
-Initial failures due to OEM design and manufacturing including initial electronic piece part earty failures.
-Initial failures due to design inadequaces in selecting or applying commercial or "off the shelf' 1
l designed equipment.
-Mitial failures due to inherent material defects, l i
-Operational errors and extemal or initiating events. l l
-intentional run to failure.
- Correcbve maintenance based on the Pass / Fail of a surveillance test is not considered a I MPFF unless the equipment could not have performed its funcbon, e.g., check vafve leak rate 4
I . - .- .
i test. Although the component has exceeded a defined condition, maintenance is only l
- performed once that cond# bon is exceeded, i
Components being out of speeh'Jen (e.g. breaker trip tm)is >'ot considered a MPFF l unless the equipment cou6d not have performed its furcion. l 1 Paciong leakage is not a MPFF unless the equipment could not perform its funcbon, Mmor j leaks will be considered MPFF's if the valve funceon is to prevent radiological releases. 1 ! Functional failure of a component that can be demonstrated to be a first time event (plant and j industry) and the plant had no reasonable way of expecdng an occurrence (vendor manual or ; related experience), will not be tallied as an MPFF against a Performance Criterion. However, j it will be tallied as part of the repeat MPFF count. i l Refer to Figure 1. MPFF Program Areas and Basic Ceuses, for the determination of ! Maintenance Preventable based on funcbonal failure basic cause. i e 9 S-
. Y J , n
- a. _
- r s w .
,,,a a m"m _ st
- == o '
*" =__ ww s_N m.
, mih e
WwK a l " - mst _
= , = -m ,m mns e n -
g g
* =
=a i
r""* e n E' i laee a n E 7 e -E m- e s 8 '" - - ,.p.h n ma g _ w =w- e .e m s.us ~ m w8' " - =,ah mf ouc e t 8 ** t- 7 ee sea 7 t d _ oe
- Nta _
~
. i o ee r
l
=
e - n " u aR . I w._ m.m e " t ac e _ e
.C
- W eeu m.
pi oe s s pwp e e n - a - .- sn hn t a s a r e _. e e A _ un st m
" r_ .g.-
a ai a r g S E _. b m i .
. CM P o
r , _. * % +ai.,.
. . t .
=. s= ,.
.=
S ; e == U p d
, a -
A 1 r a m e s - s n- - m. -
. m C o _
, eT- mo -
e= C I S
=-
un7 ss
,w.e .g 8
A W B D el 1 N s EA_ ' n e * - m
=m o
~
=
RS
- r J =
m u e ,, M s m. UA r ,,m , T*Em. 1
- e P .
e cn e g
*g GE s y _
- T F u R . a. era i a n 8 a' .
au I
- .. w 8e FA .t -
= ,
e ssm i r - *c a - M _=-___
~
I, - -
** g-e
,*O4 nC _
~
~
A R
. _-. ?_ __
_t ted ne m up i t aa G_ m _ u e
. m O _ ,
e
. Mle _
a R .
.mma r
2 s a R e P n ww g t sw 6
'm .-
n c . F l a v ws_n o s e -e a .
- a. -
o ure o m w F s 1 c w.m a h n -
's. a e-
+
P _ c u r e si.e. 'h e W
- s. . s M 7,r em rs >
e. e _ k c- , , m e owu s ae . N
~ .
_ w-
~
W
- _ =p.
- n. e
) , %p _
m I m o em -
*o w m.
s ~ w -m _e n e
. c
_p e.m_,,m
. o s _ -
n I
- s
- e. ,
'ae
_N m u == s . r a p
- p%_ h * % m. a . n e
M=3_* 8 3 1 - _ - ~ n g M n*
=
=
_m e m m a m o., 7 ' e e s m g a
=
e s
- hs aa s .
N *=== c_ P ae u, _, e-s h
>h r n
e7 ,o , BP > n_
!. frGuPE Yta d (Exx,n PLE l j SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR -g Z - SSC: 9b - Auxiliary Feedwater Status:(a)(2) Updated: 14 March,1996 ! i j Performance Monitoring Period: Previous 12 months for OOS hrs & LERs,36 months for all others. l Performance Crtteria: l Unavailability: U1& U2 <88 hrstyr per A&B train,168 hrs /yr per C train (OOS hrs - 12 month period) Reliability: 11 Repetative_MPEEs. and 5 2 unrelated MPFF1per_traut36 month period. , PLPC 3: 51 unplanned and LER reportable ESF actuations last 12 months. (Exludes AFAS) l ] UNAVAILABILITY: $ n . .. .
. . g ..
t ,
..)
- v. .
i l . m
, EmumEMEEE. .!.!5...f,"".
M i
%4Wiiiiici EpsmussmEgingi a l
4 a REALIABILITY: List all train failures, corrective acbons and MPFFs (attach ADM 17.08 Figs, STARS, etc.) l l 2C AFW train 2/27/93 - SE-09-4 grounded by water intrusion, valve may not have r,troked dunng valid demand. 3/13/96 - SE-09-4 failure to open during surveillance testing. Cause due to intermittent keyswitch fautt. (Root Cause Report SCE 96-10) j 11/6/95 - MV-09 Broken torque switch discovered during testing. Possible MPFF. { 9/20/95 - MV-08-3 tnp hook and latching lever indicated excessive wear causing a tnp of the mech over speed l trip mechanism. Loss of 1 of 3 trains AFW. Cause appears to be normal wear. Possible MPFF i 9/15/95 - CKT BKR 60903 for MV-08-13 shorted due to water intrusion causing loss of 1 of 3 trains of AFW. l Switch was replaced, new gasket installed on junct:on door. Possible MPFF. 2A AFW train 3/1/94 - 2A AFW motor breaker would not close due to broken cottor pin. Possible MPFF PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE CRITERIA-0 Unplanned LER repodable ESF actuations for the past 3 years Trends: l 2B AFW-(35.8 hrs unavail. Aug 95) caused O3 95 spike. j 2C AFW -(51.5 hrs unavail. Sep 95 due to corrective maintenance) reason for O3 95 spike.
- 4 funcbonal failures (not all maintenance preventable) on C AFW train in past 3 ac- -
i ,. 3 Recent aoolicable Industry information: 1 j INPO SER 4-95,
- Terry Turbine Govemor (Woodward) Valve Stem Binding
- j
,.. 1 SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR , SSC: Status:(t)( ) Updated: Performance Monitaina Peetod-Performance Criteria: Unavailabiitty. Reliability. PLPC l
- , . _ . . l j
1 UNAVAILABILITY-1 I l l EIABillTY: 1 l l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Trends: Recent apol6 cable Industrv information: a.
nsviDRAEST 2 rnoctoudMRtEMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAos: THE MAINTENANCE RULE 30 of 36
, ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
" "d6D"@,73 ST. LUCIE PLANT 1 FIGURE 4 (Page 1 of 2)
Goal Setting and Monitoring Date: Risk Significant: 0 Yes o No Unit: 1 2 SSC: Reason for Goal Setting: Performance Criteria Not Met Which criteria were not met? Description of Events: Repetitive MPFF (attach Figure 3 for each failure) Explain how failures are repetitive. Were previous corrective actions inadequate? References (attach): Does this SSC require (a)(1) status? Oyes o No System Owner Yes - signature of Expert Panel Member Maintenance Rule Coofdinator No - signature and reason why not Expert Panel Chairman
l ... naviDAM5T 2 PnoceoustMRLEMENTATION OF 10 CFR S0.65, PAGE: THE MAINTENANCE RULE 31 of 36 i ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE "ED ST. LUCIE PLANT
. i l
FIGURE 4 (Page 2 of 2) l Goal Setting and Monitoring (continued) . Root Cause Analysis: Assigned to: I l Corrective Actions and Responsibilities: Assigned to: l 1. 2. 3. 4. l Goal Setting and Monitoring: For each corrective action, there should be a goal l to be attained that shows the action was correct, monitoring for a follow-up period to verify success, and a discussion to show how PSA and industrywide
- operating experience were used in the process.
Goal- Monitoring method & frequency Date PSA/ Industry Exp ! 1. 1. l 2. 2.
- 3. 3.
- 4. 4.
Prepared by: System Owner Date Review and Concurrence: Maintenance Rule Coordinator Date '- 1 i' Review and Approved: , Expert Panel Chairman Date
% Form Version: 0 Corrective Action Form l e.
2 PGAAl Site:ESL Source Number: PM96G527 Document. WALCHESKI PMAl REQOriginator:SCE Due Date: 3/2W96 A.soigned Deptertment: SCE SCE/SWIATEK Q Implementor Name Unit Outage Mode SNO NCR OWA
Description:
AS A MAINT. RULE IMPLEMENTATION ACTMTY, A 3 YR HISTORICAL REVIEW OF SSC'S WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE MANT. RULE WAS PERFORMED TO ID POTENTIAL FUNCTIONAL FAILURES. NPRDS/ PASSPORT DATA REQUIRES FURTHER EVAL; REVIEW AND ID MAINTENANCE PREVENTABLE FUNCTIONAL FAILURES CASES: UST OCCURENCES ON, OR ATTACH TO SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR. EXJGUIDANCE ATTACED CONT. SPRAY:10 ANY REPEAT MPFFS IS/ME OCCUR. REVIEW RESULTS WITH SSC ocoenom er eDrTEDLA tr AMY De ik CYr'FFnrn nHDI CTF Fin J j Acceptance seccon Status / Comments I understand and accept responsblity of the above hated action and due date Department Manager Signature l Due Date Extension /T ransfer Respons Delity Requests l Appvd By Extend Io Date Request Dy / Dele Supervsor/Date Dngenator/Date Manager / Dele extena io uste Moquest oy Ivate supervoorivate ungsnatorivate managerrusse Reasons: Appvd By M EH Resp. To Request by /Date Supervnor/Date Manager /Date ___Reopent/Date Reasons: [ Completion sectionl Completx>n Date: CloreCut Documenta: Comments: Completed By: / Date j l Reviewed By: / Date: Approved By: / Date: Reviewed By: / Date: e l
t i ST. LUCIE ACTION REPORT Q mMSEM '
** M%-03 -527 .
Deid1RI% y PersorWDepsenantInthenn A IA/4Le//Est/,/SEE Unit //2
& ,; . ; 3.
Systern /M 6 PEA,/ Am A A/la --e Put.s /m,--%n.or6wvv. A 3 Vent.indvidued Nomad 0 SW/ ATEr 14tarm un> forwsuW of $$Ca WerHM nJA %-as of Tnd MtAne ^^ -"nr Aun.C wAs' AEst '"~__ ' ~a -ro Ir .nas/ h.^mst G_w - FE,- h *a a Alpene s e. Pa n s h .r- Operesarmortmound t w -A wilreo+ A~ *a=r f~vasruann E~n.> >w R2^ ear.'=saw m y,,
^ e / ~ -
_ 2,r,/ esss dasare n'_ , Mew.s afA, .-a fmAds47 hw.rt--rac 1~Ar n asm. A+sh Lisr ruexw ***
- M oce.vu - oa. -L w a -ro sse Pas m-'Iwwarat. . Name of NPS Named
{ w et - A.~n 6vo a wes km &
~
E Os. NRC Consepondenas f', Aus Report, E h DreeW f. Personneloboensson, sec.) - h AbM l*7. o B . fours -an=wrwrua ns: loc /~4.*50.t.r. Tne Mkm M '*, /0 CFR Go.t,C' . AfuMAu.d3.c l ~ Amons
- 1. War.eny steps tehen a ndlignes? Yes No
- 2. = = .or. meyand. ore moysucomesur vareu,-s
)
- 3. a.emuseoroorunnan iam vuu-s
- 4. Recommendedon = con.a and depenment aponsen. As sw so, /uneen-r - c. s-,.r , ses
, n W M M"" k b I 0I b yGJ f@ W m M YM M -1 REVIEW / APPROVAL
- 1. Assiped Deparenant. 5M
- 2. RootCause .
PF-700 Ptent Pichiern Report Irweed0ess and Conect] TectrucalSecommnese Rowow Requwed OperebEty Aenessment Required: JPN OPS [ SCE z ""d" "*"od Ya C No l [ 4. Complottore 1 2 3 4 5 is leem a modo houf? 1 2 3 3/1750 4 5 Train Sump
"*Y 560 0 0 vm O No OCC C C i Requend Commament Does: 3 / 78 Ijf. Asmoned Outeos:
I Commerts: i l sen= ur. o=o i i oo m re,use oppm <=e .O vos O No
- e J Evert Inslator Code System Code Causal Factor Code o \
(ty.rs an ufu) (nsv.s. ioes)
_.. - -. --. . _ _ _ _ -_ . . - - _ _ - ~ .
- PMAl Form Version: 0
( Corrective Action Form I O PMA! Site:ESL Source Number:PM960M28 Document:W6LCBESELEMALBEQOrigittator:SCE Due Date: 3/295gl Assigned l Md**"t: SCE SCE/SWIATEK Q l lT, u.h Name Unit Outage Mode SNO NCR OWA
Description:
AS A MAINT. RULE IMPLEMENTATION ACTMTY, A 3 YR HISTORICAL REVIEW OF SSC'S WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE MAINT. RULE WAS PERFORMED TO ID POTENTIAL FUNCTIONAL FAILUREF NPRD6/ PASSPORT DATA REQUIRES FURTHER EVAL: REVIEW AND ID MAINTENANCE ( PREVENTABLE FUNCTIONAL FAILURES CASES: UST OCCURENCES ON, OR ATTACH TO SSC ' PERFORMANCE INDICATOR. EX./ GUIDANCE ATTACHED LPSI:lO IC f*DrTTDIA ANY AMVREPEAT MPFF'S D(* IC CYf'FEriCM t'tMADf (SAMECit!CAUSE{ A OCCUR. REVIEW RESULTS WITH SSC PERFO { Acceptance beCDon l Status / Comments: I understand and accept responsibility of the above listed action and due date - Department Manager Signature l Due Date Extension / Transfer Responsibility Requests l Appvd By Extend To Date __ Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Onginator/Date Manager /Date tucteno io vate Mequest Dy Ivate supervisor /vate vnginatortuate manager /uste Reasons: Appvd By ht;R Resp. To Request by /Date supervisor /Date Manager /Date Recipent/Date Reasons: l [ Completion Secbonl , Completion Date: 3[M /Q(, Close-Out Docurnents: \ Comments: Evinh in //x's enajaa art nnf M1PfB
/
i l Completed Dy: ! - _/ AcSr.O fal _ Date: d .74!94 Reviewed By: / Date: Approved By: / Date: ,. Rev. .ed St AW y
, e- Date: a blu
. /
?
b b>
/ Nucteer Plant 2;tiability DJ,t2 System Generet Report Port Terry K. Mitter Reportald: WMtG00AA Florida Power & Light Company Job Ntsaber: 7348 Run Date: 02/24/96 Run Times 08:41 Intro h tlon:
Th2 attached report taas generated by your cpJery of the NPROS data base. A stamary of your cpaery is listed below. QUERY: You sstected the following search condition (s): Find Falture Discovery Dates that are af ter 01/01/93 Selected Unit 10 is ST. LUC @ Selected System is Shutdown Cool-CE Th$re wire Wecords meetirq the search condition (s). l DISPLAY AND SORT: l J You szlected to run general report 4 , Ccaponent Failure Brief Report You chose to sort the report by: Sort Sequence Field Name 1 Unit 10 value 2 Utility Component ID 3 Failure Discovery Datedf gothic 9 type (letter gothic 09 medita) codepege tid 0bese (
.Of gothic 9 )
l
- i Nuclear Plant R2Llobility Data System - Failure BriCf Report Rm Dets: 02/21/%
NPRG04AA . By: Unit 10
- v;lue, Utility Component ID, Fsilurs Discovery D t3 Job Number: 7368 l
, Unit _ ,, Comp,, _ Utility Component id_,,, ,,,,Da t es Narratives e .51 PUMP LPSI-1B DD: 05/04/93 Desc: WITH TME UNIT OFF LINE DURING A ROUTINE MECHANICAL MAINTENANCE 10: 06/28/93 INSPECTION OF THE 15 LOW PRESSURE SAFETY INJECil0N PUMP REVEALED A NOT Appl: RMPU BEARING CONDITION ON THE INSIDE THRUST BEARING . THE PLMP WAS SMUT Dese: *RNR Pump DOWN FOR INVESTIGATION Ale REPAIR . THIS WAS A_ LOSS OF ONE FLOWPATM nF - ,
/ SMUTD0nM COOLING THIS PREVENTED THE PLANT FROM CHANGING MODES , I Fme: REQUIRED THE REACTOR CAVITY TO DE FLOCDED TO ENSURE f
Dxc Cause: NEAT REMOVAL , AND ADOED FOUR 3AYS DELAY TO TME REFUELING OUTAGE
. THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS FOUND TO BE INCORRECT INSTALLATION Mfr: 1075 Ingersoll Rand OF THE BEARING MOUSING RESERVOIR O!LER . THIS ALLOWED A VERY LOW OIL l LEVEL RESULTING IN IECMANICAL DAMAGE OF THE BEARING . j Mod Num: SIZE 8 X 21 ALM Action CORRECTIVE ACTION INCLLDED BEARING REPLACEMENT OF THE PLMP , AND Mod Id: TYPE SL PROPER TRAINING FOR THE USE OF INSTALLING THESE STYLE OILERS . FAILURE System: CFD -Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Cool-CE ANALYSIS WAS PERFORMED BY FPL PREDICTIVE MAINT . ( PWO #93013181/ ND0
) f
- Sys: LPS!/SC I
l 00: 03/31/93 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS SHUTDOWN FOR A REFUEllWG OUTAGE A CONTROL ROOM l FPLSLS1 VALVOP MV 03 2 10: 06/19/93 OPERATOR REPORTED THAT MV 03 2 ( BY PASS VALVE FOR LPSI ( LOW PRESSURE Appl: SAFETY INJECTION ) PLMP DISCHARGE ) WOULD NOT STROKE COMPLETLY ( APP 0X f Duci g 50% ) OPEN ON DEMAND . THis DEGRADED THE BY PASS CAPIBILITY OF 1 TRAIN l OF LPSI . THERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE PLANT , 1 Func: Cause: TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED THAT THE TORQUE SWITCH SETTING WAS NOT Dzsc: SET PROPERLY SO AS TO ALLOW THE VALVE To FULLY STROKE . CAUSE UNKNOWN
, POSSIBLY DUE TO AGlWG .
Mfr: L200 - Limitorque Corp y/\ , Action: THE TORQUE SWITCH SETTING WAS INCREASED BY 1 FULL INCREMENT ( FROM 1. 5 To 2 . 5 ) TO THE MAXILM ALLOWABLE SETTING . MV 03 2 WAS Mod rum: SMB 00-10 tod id: SMS-00 10 TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOW 93010405 ) TKM System: CFD -Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Cool-CE 1 Utl Sys: LPSI/SC j FPLSLS1 VALVOP MV 07 1B 00: 09/23/93 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS AT FULL POWER AND DURING PREVENTIVE ID: 10/07/94- MAINTENANCE ON THE REFUELING WATER TANK FEED TO LOW AND MIGN PRESSURE Apple RMBWSCVAVO SAFETY INJECTION AND CONTAINMENT SPRAY PLMPS MOTOR OPERATED VALVE ( l Desc: *RNR Suct From RWST/BWST isol Valvop p MV 07-1B > !T WAS REPORTED THAT THE VALVE'S ACTUATOR WAS VERY l j DIFFICULT TO OPERATE IN MANUAL AND IT WOULD NOT STAT IN MANUAL UNLESS Func: THE DECLUTCH LEVER WAS CONTINUALLY DEPRESSED . THER WAS No EFFECT ON Dese: THE SYSTEM OR PLANT BECAUSE THE VALVE IS REQUIRED TO OPERATE AUTOMATICALLY ONLY . Mfr: L200 - Limitorcpe Corp cause: TROUBLESHOOTING REVEALED THAT THE ' TRIPPER' FINGER ASSEMBLY IN
.aod Nun: SMB 00 10 THE VALVE ACTUATOR COULD No LONGER BE ADJUSTED . THE CAUSE is UNKNOWN Mod Id: SMB 00 10 BUT AGING IS SUSPECTED .
Action: A NEW TRIPPER FikCER ( PIECE PART ) WAS INSTALLED . MV 0718 WAS System: CFD -Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Cool CE TESTED AND RETURNED TO SERVICE . ( WOW 93023430 ) $$C [ l Utl Sys: LPSI/SC
Nucteer Plant R:llability D ta System - Fellura Brief Report Rm Dets: 02/26/96 RPRG04AA - ' By: tmit ID v:Lue, Utility Component ID, FGilure Diccovery D:t3 Job Mu ser: 7368 [ Unit _ , Comp , _ Utility Component Id.,,,,, ,,,Detes Narratives 00: 06/15/93 Dese: WITN THE tRitT ON LINE NORMAL OPERATOR DUTIES REVEALED A 1. 5 EPM 8 11 ACCUMU RWT j ID: 09/08/93 DECREASING TREW IN THE REFUELING WATER TANK ( RWT ) LEVEL . TME LEAK Appt: NAD NO EFFECT ON THE SYSTEM OR PLANT OPERATIONS . Deses Cause: DIVERS bERE SENT IN AND LOCATED A SINGLE LEAK IN A PITTED AREA AT THE 80TTGt 0F TME RWT . TNC PITTING WS UNKNOWN PRIOR TO TN!S TIIE AND p F ec: IS CURRENTLY LASER INVESTIGATION . SUSPECT CORR 0810N AS THE CAUSE . Desc Action AN EVALUATION ES PERFORIED TO PROVIDE REPAIR RECOSEBATICBIS . TNE TEWORARY REPAlt MS MADE USING AN AltR41NUM BACKING PLATE WITN AN Kfra C310 - Chicago Bridge & tron to EPOKY . TNis IS TNE RECOGENDED PRACTICE FOR UNDERWATER MAINTENANCE . i Mod Num: DWG. No. SK 8770N 28 IW nAs PWOfF5021399 Mod Id: Systen: CFD -Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Cool CE Utl Sys LPS!/SC FPtSLSI VALVE V 3439 Dos 04/13/93 Deses WITN THE UNIT OFF LINE DURlWGJ MAINTENANCE SURVE!LLANCE TEST OF ID: 06/28/93 LOW PRES $uRE SAFET' JNJECTION 8 A' HEADER SAFETY RELIEF VALVE ( V 3439 Appl ) IT WAS FOUND THAT Thl VALVE LIFTED LOW ( 445 PSI INSTEAD 500 ) AND WAS SLOW TO CLOSE . SECAa,% THE VALVE OPERATED WITHIN PLANT 0:sc: SPECIFICATIONS THERE WAS NO EFFECT ON SYSTEM OR PLANT FUNCTION . Func: Cause: THE CAUSE OF FAILURE WAS UNKNOWN . A LOWER ADJUST 9ENT RING WAS Decca g' FOUND FRO 2EN DURING DISASSEMSLY . SUSPECT BINDING OF INTERNAL PARTS . Action: THE VALVE WAS RENOVED AND REPLACED WITH A LIKE FOR LIKE SPARE .
.'(
Mfr: C710 Crosby Vetve & Cage to Mod Kum: J8 355 TD f THE ORIGINAL VALVE WAS REPAIRED AND PLACED IN STORAGE AS A SPARE PWO #92051666 / N00 ) Mod Id: STYLE J8
.ystem: CFD -Low Press Sofety Inject / Shutdown Cool-CE ,
Utl Sys: LPSI/SC FPLSLS1 VALVE V 3439 00: 08/10/95 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS $ NUTTING DOWN TO IWYESTIGATE A PROBLEM WITH A ID: 10/16/95 PORY ( POWER OPERATED RELIEF VALVE ) AND WHILE TRYING TO ESTABLISN SDC Appts ( SHUTDOWN COOLING ) !T WAS DISCOVERED TMAT V 3439 ( THERMAL RELIEF Dzsc: VALVE IN THE CDee0N LPSI (LOW PRES $URE SAFETY INJECTION) DISCNARGE ME ) MAD LIFTED DURING LPSI PUMP START AND WOULD NOT RESEAT . THIS Func: (D GRADE THE SNUTDOWN COOLING SYSTEM . THERE WAG MO EFFECT ON THE Dse: PLANT . TROUBLESN00TlWG CONFIRMED THAT V 3439 HAD FAILED OPEN . Cause: THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE EVENT WAS A LACK OF DESIGN MARG l2 BET' KEN Mfr: C710 Crosby Velve & Gege Co THE RELIEF VALVE LIFTING AND RESEATING SETPOINTS AND NORMAL SDC SYSTEN
,d Num: JS 355 TD PRESSURE .
Kod Id: STYLE JB Action: TNE THERMAL RELIEF VALVE WAS REPLACED AND THE SETPOINT PRESSURER WAS INCREASED .114 CTNER SAFETY RELIEF VALVES WERE EVALUATED FOR A System: CFD Low Press Sofety Inject / Shutdown Coot CE SIMILAR SITUATION AND WILL 8E ADJUSTED As APPROPIATE . ( Wof95022465 ) Utt Sys: LPSI/SC ( Wo#95022460 ) ( l'e 95 006 ) dbt I /
._ _ .__ m . . _ __ _ _ _ . . . . _ - _ - _. _ _ _ . . _ _
i . l NPRG04AA , Nucleer Plant R*llability Dets System - Frituro erief Report ans: Det:: 02/24/96 Oy Unit ID vetue, Utility component ID, Failure Discovery Det2 Job Number 7368 l Unit Cosp_ _ Utility Compom nt Id _ _,Detes marrettwee .
.51 VALVE V 3469 00: 02/27/95 Desc WITN TNE UNIT OFF tief _. DURING A BENCH FLOW LIFT TEST , SAFETT
- 10: 04/24/95 INJECTION SNUTDOW COOLING RETURN RELIEF VALVE ( V 3469 ) FOR THE B Appl RETURN NEADER LIFTED 5 . 3% A80VE THE 3% SET POINT CRITERIA . BECAUSE Desc: THE 8 SNLFTDOW RETURN LOOP WAS IN MAINTENANCE AT THE TIE OF DISCOVERY
, TWERE W RE NO SYSTEN OR PLANT EFFECTS .
Funet / Cause THE EXACT ROOT CAusE OF THE FAILURE WAS NOT DETERNIM D . SUSPECT Desc: WORN SEATS AW THE N0ZZLE BEING GJT OF ADJUSTENT WAS TME SUSPECTED CAUSE OF FAILtmE Mfra C710 - Crosby Velve & Gage Co d' Action: THE VALVE WAS RBIOVED FR(M SERVICE AW REPLACED WITN A LI E FOR LIE SPARE , LPON RENCN TESTING AW ADJUSTENTS . FOR NW INFORN4Tl0N Mod Nues JR SPEC Mod id: STYLE JR , SEE STAR REPORTS 950240 . PWOf95005134 300 System: CFD Low Press safety inject /Shutoown Cool CE utt Sys: LPSI/SC FPLSLS1 VALVE V 3480 00 03/29/94 Dese: DURING A CONTAINMENT SURVEILLANCE INSPECTION , WITH THE LOW 10: 05/23/94 PRES $URE SAFET INJECTION SYSTEM IN SERVICE , SHUT DOWN COOLING LOOP Appt: RHRXSCVA RETURN VALVE ( V-3480 ) FROM THE 1A LOOP , WAS FOUND TO BE LEAKING AT Desc: *RNR Retr Clnt Suct Isol Velve THE BONNET GASKET . ALTMOUGH THE LEAK DID NOT EXCEED LEAKAGE CRITERA , if WAS REPAIRED WITMIN A 24 NOUR PERIOD , ( PROMPT REPAlt ) DUE To s. Func: MANAGEMENT DEClsl0N . TMIS DELAYED UNIT START UP AND WAS_ CONSIDERED A Dsse DE8AAD% TRAIN OF THE LOW PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION ( LPSI / SC ) Sts. TEM . l i:f ra V080 velen inc Cause THE CAUSE OF THE 1 CALLOW EVERY 15 MIN LEAK WAS SUSPECTED To BE A Mod Cum: FIG. B16 3548 13MS , COMBINATION OF IMPROPER TORQUE METHODS AND BONNET ALIG M NT . THESE l TWO FACTORS WOULD HAVE CAUSED AN UNEVEN GASKET CRUSN RESULTING IN i Mod Id: 30548 GASKET LEAKAGE . THE IMPROPER TORQUE WAS RESULT OF A PROCEDURE ERROR . Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Cool CE Action: UPON RETORQUING THE SONNET NUTS , AS PER TECH MANUAL REQUIRMENTS ; system: CFD Utt Sys: LPSI/SC THE LEAK WAS REDUCED . A TEMPORART MEASURE ( SEALANT INJECTION ) WAS l PERFORMED UNTIL PERMANENT REPAIRS CAN BE MADE . THE PLANT PROCEDURE WAS ALSO REVIEWED AND DISCUSSED FOR PROPER TORQUE DOCLMENTAfl0N AS PER THE TECH MANUAL . PWOW94007374 / N00llUPDATE a THE VALVE WAS REPLACED WITH A LIKE SPAPE DURING THE NOV . 1994 OUTAGE . [ FPLSLS1 VALVE V 3482 00: 04/01/93 Dese: WITH THE UNIT OFF LINE DURlWG A MAINTENANCE SURVEILLANCE TEST OF l 10: 06/28/93 ~ SHUTDOWN COOLING 1A LOOP RETURN MEADER RELIEF VALVE ( V 3482 ) IT WAS Appts D m uvtRED ME VALVE LIFTED A80VE THE ALLOWABLE RANGE DURING A Disc: BENCH TEST ( 2520 PSIG INSTEAD OF 2435 PSIG ) . THERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE SYSTEM SINCE THE SET PRESSURE OF THE VALVE DID NOT EXCEED THE Func: Desc: %,[ Q EOSTATICPRESSUREOFTHELINE. Cause: THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS ATTRIBUTED TO FACTOR $ SUCH As l CORROS!ON AND DEBR!$ IN THE VALVE AND SURFACE BONDING OF THE SEAT AND Mfr: C710 - Crosby Velve & Gage to ( DISC . Mod Num: JR SPEC Action: THE VALVE WAS OVERHAULED WHICH INCLUDED REPLACEMENT OF THE Mod Id: STYLE JR SPINDLE , DISC AND GUIDE ASSEMBLY . UPON REASSEMSLY THE VALVE WAS ADJUSTED TO PROPER LIFT SET PRESSURE AND INSTALLED . ( NCR 1774 ) ( System: CFD -Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Coot CE PWO #92051667 / MD0 ) f Utl Sys: LPSI/SC l l l t i i
- -. . -- ~~ - -~ -- .-_-- - . _ . _ _ _ - . .-_. . - . _ _ _ . -
NPRG04AA. Nucteer Flant R: liability Dits System Falture ericf Report Rm DitS: 02/21/96 Sys Unit 10 value, Utility Component ID, Fsilure Discovery Dits Job Number: 7368 uni t_ , Comp,,, ,,,,,Uti t i ty Camponent Id,,_ _Detse Werrativos i+ $1 VALV0P V 3652 00: 03/03/95 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS OFFLINE FOR OTHER MAINTENANCE CONCERNS , Am
- 10 06/01/95 DURING A SPECIAL INSPECTION IT WAS FOUND THAT THE MOTOR OF TME j Appl: RNRXSCVAVO SMUTDOWN COOLING RETURN FOR LOOP 18 VALVE OPERATOR V 3652 ) WAS OR Desc: *RMA Retr Clit Suct Isol Valvop ~ GROUISED . THE UNIT WAS OFFLINE CAUSING No EFFECT ON TNE PLANT . TROUBLESN00 TING BT ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE FOU W A PINCHED Fecs INTERNAL IIDTOR LEAD .tTNE *f"e"*n ' ran "m**n TN earnam ,
Dese A Cause THE CAUSE OF THE PINCHED LEAD IS UNKN0h(f . 1 Action: THE PINCNED NOTOR LEAD WAS RELUGGED . THE MOTOR,W$$ IEGGERED Am t;fr: L200 Limitorque Corp RETURNED TO SERVICE . ( Wof 95006614 ) $$C g i Mod Num: Spes-1 40 Mod Id: SMs 1 40 ] yh I Systems CFD Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Cool-CE l I Utl Sys LPSI/SC FPLSLS1 CETBRE 20406 DD: 09/27/94 Desc: WITN THE PLANT AT FULL POWER AND DURING A ROUTINE SURVIEl. LANCE ID: 12/09/94 TEST , IT WAS FOUND THAT THE CIRCUlf BREAKER FOR 1B LOW PRESSURE Appli RWPUMOCK SAFETY INJECTION PUMP ( LPSI ) MOTOR ( 20406 ) WOULD NOT CLOSE ON J De!c: *RNR Punp Motor Cktbrk DEMAND BECAUSE THE TWO SECONDARY DISCONNECT CONTACTSJERE OUT OF 4 ADJUSTMENT . TNis CAUSED THE LOSS OF 10F 2 TRAINS OF LPSI . THERE WAS Fmc: W FET ON THE' PLANT , I Disc: Cause: THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS UNKNOWN SUT IS POSSIBLY DUE TO NORMAL USAGE . A d /h b Mfr: W120 Westinghouse Elec Corp / Hagen Action: ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE ADJUSTEC THE DISCONNECT PINS , 20406 WAS j Mod run: 50 DMP-250 TESTED WITN SAT! FACTORY RESULTS AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WO 8 Mod Id: 50DNP250 94024553 ) SSC
/ stem: CFD Low Press safety inject /Shutdom Cool CE j Utl Sys: LPSI/SC 1
FFLSLS1 CETBRK 41277 00 05/04/95 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER A CONTROL ROOM ID: 09/22/95 - OPERATOR REPORTED THAT V 3206 ( MOTOR OPERATED VALVE FOR LPS! (LOW Appl: PRES $URE SAFETY INJECTION) PLMP DISCMARGE ) WOULD NOT OPEN ON DEMAND . Disc: TMis WAS A LOS$ OF 10F 2 TRAINS OF LPSI . THERE WAS NO EFFECT ON THE PLAN C TROUOLESM00 TING REVEALED THAT THE REVERSING LINE STARTER ( Fune: PIECE PART ) IN CIRCUIT BREAKER 41277 ( CIRCUIT BREAKER FOR V 3206 ) Disc: MAD A manrfM MFrMAMff K WHICH PREVENTED IT FROM OPERATING V-3206 ON DEMANO . .g w Thf . Mfr: C080 General Electric Company cause: CAUSE OF BROKEN INTERLOCK IS UNKNOWN , POS$1BLY DUE TO ASNORMAL J Eun: TEC 36007 STRESS . y j Mod id: TEC3 Action: A NFW LINE STARTER WAS IKSTALLED . 41277 AND V 3206 WERE TESTED 1 AND RETURNED To NORMAL . ( W0s95013309 ) TKM System: CFD Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Cool CE Utl Sys LPSI/SC j ?
.-.. . . ~ . _ . . - - - . .. . . ... .. - .
Nucteer Plant Reliability 0:ta System Gerier?.4 Report 8or: icrry K. Miller Report Ids WPRG00AA Fttrida Power & Light Ccapeny Job Wumber 7370 i Rm Date: 02/24/96
- tm Times 06:45
Introduction:
Th2 attached report was generated by your query of the NPRDS data base. A sumnary of your query is listed below. l l l 4 QUERY: 1 4 You salected the following search condition (s): Find Failure Discovery Dates that are after 01/01/93 Selected System is 6 es W Shutdown Coot-CE Selected Unit 10 is ST. L g 4 Thsre we @ $ecords aseeting the search condition (s). I DISPLAY AND SORT: fou satected to run general report 4 Conponent Failure Brief Report You ch:se to sort the report by: Sort Sequence Fleid Name 1 Unit 10 value ( 2 Ut i L i ty Congonent 10 ; 3 Falture Olscovery Datedf gothic 9 type (letter gothic 09 medium) codepage tid 0bese i I bf githic9 i l l l
. l Nuctecr Plant Estlability Dato System - Fcituro trief Report Rm Dets: 02/24/96 l upRgo4AA '
Sy: Unit ID v:Lue, Utility Component 10, Falture Discovery Det2 Job thaber: 7370
, unit _,, _ Comp, _ Utility Component Id_,, _ Dates Narratives LS2 INTCPM E/P 3648 DD: 03/26/94 Desc: WHILE THE _ PLANT WAS SNUTDOW FOR A REFUELING OUTAGE AND DURING TME
- ID: 04/11/94 PERFORMA$NCE OF THE NORMAL PERICelt LOOP CALS ( CAllBRATIONS ) IT WAS Appl: DISCOVERED THAT E / P 3648 ( ELECTRO PNEUMATIC POSITIONER FOR McV 3648 D:sc (CONTROL VALVE FOR SIT ( SAFETY INJECTION TANK ) 282 REC!RC) ) WAS BAD AE MAD NO CUTPUT . TNIS PREVENTS THE S!T FROM BEING FILLED Am Fmes DRAINED SUT DOES INJ, AFFECT ITS SAFETY FUNCTION . THERE WH NO EFFECT Discs ,
ON THE PLANT . y g\ Cause: TROLSLESN00 TING CONFIRIED THAT E / P 3648 NAD FAILED A2 NAD N0 Mfra F120 - Fischer & Porter Co y CUTPUT . THE CAUSE IS -m BUT !$ POS$1BLY DUE TO AGING . Mod Nus: 3590 r Action: A NEW ELECTRO PNELMATIC POSITIONER WAS INSTALLED . E / P 3648 Mod Id: AND NCV 3648 WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOf94007107 ) TDI System: CFD -Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Coot-CE Utt Sys: LPSI/SC FPLSLS2 VALVE HCV 3635 DD: 09/27/95 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER A CONTROL ROOM ID: 02/02/ % OPERATOR REPORTED THAT HCV 3635 ( MOTOR OPERATED VALVE FOR LPS! (LOW Appt: RHRXDSVA PRESSURER SAFETY INJECTION) FEED TO LOOP 281 ) WAS LEAKING BY THE SEAT Dsse: 'RNR Disch Isot Valve WHEN THE $1T ( SAFETY INJECTION TANK ) WAS BEING FILLED USING THE NPSI ( MIGH PRESSURE SAFETT INJECTION ) P(MP , TH!$ WAS EVIDENT AS THE Fuw: DISCHARGE PRESSURE ON THE 28 LPSI PUMP DISCHARGE EQUALIZED WITH HEADER Dsse: PRESSURE . THE DISCHARGE GAUGE SHOULD READ ZERO WITH MCV 2635 CLOSED . UPON VALVE DISASSEMBLT IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE SEAT AND PLUG WERE Mfra T020 - Target Rock Corp' / PITTED WHICH CAUSED THE SEAT LEAKAGE . THERE WAS NO EFFECT ON THE Mod Nun: DWG 75C006 TRAIN SYSTEM EPt. A NT . p Cause: THE CAUSE OF SEAT Am PtuG PITTING 15 UNKNOWN , POS$1BLY DUE TO Mod Id: NORMAL WEAR OR AGING . system: CFD Low Press Safety Inject / Shutdown Coot-CE Action: THE VALVE SEAT WAS LAPPED AND THE PLUG WAS SKIM CUT . A utt Sys: LPSI/ C SATISFACTORT BLUE CHECK WAS ACHIEVED . HCV 3635 WAS TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . WOf95026964 ) TKM FPLSLS2 ICNTRL MIC-3628 DD: 03/26/94- Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS SMUTDOWN FOR A REFUELING OUTAGE AND DURING THE ID: 04/11/94 NORMAL PERIODIC LOOP CALIBRATIONS IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT HlC-3628 ( Appt: MAND INDICATING CONTROLLEk FOR NCV 3648 (CONTROL VALVE FOR Sif (SAFETY Disc INJECTION TANK) 2A1 RECIRC) ) WOULD NOT PUT CUT MORE THAN 85% OUTPtri . f THIS DEGRADED THE RECIRCULAfl0N TRAlu FOR THE 2A1 S!T . THERE WAS NO Funct M EFFECT ON THE PLANT . Q Dsse: Cause: TROUBLESHOOTING REVEALED THAT MIC 3628 MAD FAILED LOW AND COULD NOT BE REPAIRED . THE CAUSE !$ UNKNOWN SUT !$ POSSIOLY DUE TO AGING . Rfr: F120 Fischer & Porter Co {$ Action: A NEW ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) CONTROLLER WAS INSTALLED . MIC-3628 A W Mod Nun: 53 ED-4111 NCV 3628 WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( W0s94007105 ) TKM Mod Id: 53E04 System: CFD Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Coot CE utt Sys: LPSI/SC
[PRG04AAr NuctSar Plant R:llability Dits System a Failure Bel:f Report Anst Det . 02/24/96 By: Unit ID - value, Utility Component 10, Failuro Discovery Dets Job Number: 7370 . , Unit _ _ Comp , _ Utility Component Id Dates Narratives
$2 ICNTRL MIC 3638 00: 07/01/93 Desc: WHILE TME PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER A CONTROL ROOM ID: 07/30/93 OPERATOR REPORTED THAT ME MAD LOST CONTROL OF VALVE NCV 3638 ( NAW Appl: CONTROL VALVE FOR SAFETY INJECTION TANK 291 REClRC ) . TN!$ NAD NO Desca IMEDIATE EFFECT ON TME TRAIN AS THIS IS NOT THE DISCMARGE VALVE ONLY A RECIRC VALVE . NO EFFECT ON PLANT .
Fme: Cause TROLSLESN00 TING REVEALED THAT THERE WAS NO OUTPUT FROM N!C 3638 ( Desc nam i slCAfirsG CONTROLLER FOR NCV 3638 ) , THEREFORE THE CONTROL ROCBI i CPERATOR NAD NO CONTROL OF NCV 3638 . CAUSE UNKNOWN , POSSIBLY DUE To r.fra F120 - Fischer & Porter Co AGING . Mod Num 53 ED 4111 Action: A NEW ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) CONTROLLER WAS INSTALLED . NCV 3638 Am Mod Id: 53ED4 HIC 3638 lERE TESTED Am RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOf93018471 ) ( WOW 93018781 ) TKM System: CFD -Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Coot CE Utt Sys: LPSI/SC
\
l FPLSLS2 VALV0P MV 07-18 00: 05/24/93 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT uAS SMUTDOWN , FOR OTHER
- MAINTENANCE CONCERNS ,
ID: 10/13/93 AND DUR!llffME PERFORMANCE OF A PM ( PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ) ON Appl: RH8WSCVAVO MV 0718 ( MOTOR OPERATED CONTROL VALVE FOR RWT (REFLELING WATER TANK) 02tc: *RNR Suct From RWST/SWST Isol Valvop FEED TO LPSI (LOW PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION)', MPS! (NIGN PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION) , AND CSP (CONTAINMENT SPRAY PtMP) PtSFS } IT WAS Func: NOTED THAT THE MOTOR WOULD RUN SUT THE VALVE Wout0 NOT MOVE . Dsse: N,f Cause: THE VALVE COULD STILL BE OPERATED IN MANUAL $0 THIS(56REF3 2 TRAINS OF RWT SUPPLY TO THE LPSI , MPSI , AND CSP PLNCT i Afr: L200 - LimitorgJe Corp ON PLANT . TROUSLESM00 TING REVEALED THAT THE ' TRIPPER FINGERS' ( PIECE Mod na: SM8 0005/H38C PART ) WERE CUT OF ADJUSTMENT . CAUSE UNKNOWN , POSSIBLY DUE TO 'Our Kod Id: SM8 000 5 0F MECMANICAL ADJUSTMENT' . Action: THE TRIPPER FINGERS WERE ADJUSTED , MV 07-1B WAS TESTED AND Low Press Safety Inject / Shutdown Coot-CE RETURNED TO NORMAL , ( WOW 93014990 ) flot
.fstem: CFD Utl Sys: LPSI/SC FPLSLS2 VALVE SE 03 1A 00: 03/31/94 Dese: DURlWG AN OPERATIONAL SURVE!LLANCE TEST WITH_TME UNIT DOWN FOR 10: 05/23/94 REFUELING AND INSPECTION AN OPERATOR NOTICED THAT SAFETY INJECTION Appt: TANK FILL AND DRAIN VALVE ( SE 03- ) WAS STUCK IN TME OPEN Po$lTION Dsse AND WOULD NOT OPERATE . TMis D . LED A FLOW PATM OF TNE M g SAEFTY INJECTION TRAIN _. THERE DRS NO AFFECT ON THE PLANT .
Fune: / Cause TME CAUSE OF FAILURE WAS NOT KNOWN , SUSPECT _ WORN VALVE SEAT TMAT
" MAY MAVE CAUSED MECHANICAL BINDlWG OR STICKING .
Discs Action: THE VALVE WAS CUT CUT AND REPLACED WITM A SPARE . UPON TESTING , Mfr: 7020 - Target Rock Corp THE VALVE WAS RETURNED TO SERVICE , PWOW94007541 / N00 J nn: TBE 006 Mod Id: System: CFD -Low Press Safety inject / Shut Cool CE Utl Sys LPS!/SC I l
NPRG04Ak Nucteer Plant R:llebility D:ta System F2ilure Brt:f Report Run Date: 02/24/96 By: Unit ID - value, Utility Component ID, Falluro Discovery D t3 Job Na ber 7370 , Unit,_ ,, Comp _ j ility Couponent Id.,,,, ,_ Dates Narratives l
.52 VALVE SE 03 1B DD 02/03/94 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS CW THE LINE AT FULL POWER CONTROL ROOM l
- 10: 04/11/94 PERSONNEL REPOPRTED TNAT SE 03 1A ( SOLEN 0!D VALVE FOR SAFETY
! Appt: INJECTION TANK 2A2 FILL & DRAIN ) ( UNITIZED ) WOULD WOT OPEN ON Desc: DEMAND . THE SAF,ETY E INJECTION TANK COULD STILL MAVE FULFILLED ITS INTEWED FLAICTION BUT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN REFILLED OR ORA!NED . TNERE Funct WAS NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . l Dese: Cause: TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED TMAT A TERMINAL LUG ( PIECE PART ) WAS I BROKEN . TME CAUBE IS m u , BUT WAS POS$1BLY DUE TO AGlWG . Efr: 1020 - Target Rock Corp Action: A NEW LUG WAS CRIMPED ON . SE 031B WAS TESTED AND RETURNED TO
- Mod NJm
- 7BE 006 NORMAL . ( Wof96002955 ) TKM
! Mod Id: l System: CFD Low Press Safety inject / shutdown Coc! CE Utl Sys: LPSI/SC FPLSLS2 VALVE SE 03 1C 00: 03/01/94 Desc: DURIMG A SURVEILLANCE TEST 281 SAFETY INJECTION TANK FILL & DRAIN 10: 05/25/94 VALVE ( SE 031C ) WAS STUCK CLOSED AND WOULD NOT OPERATE . THE UNIT I Apple WAS OFF LINE FOR REFUELING & INSPECTION AND ONLY DEGRADED THE FILL D%sc: PATH OF THE SAFETY INJECTION TRAIN . Cause: INSPECTION REVEALED THE MAlW DISC , PILOT DISC , PISTON RING AND Func: / SLEEVE WERE WORN ALSO THE MAGNETIC CAP DN THE SOLENCID VALVE WAS OUT l Dssca d 0F ADJUSTMENT . SUSPECTED CAUSE OF FAILURE WAS BINDING DUE TO WEAR OF INTERNALS .
$tfr: T020 - Target Rock Corp 4 Action: REPLACED MAIN AND PILOT DISC ASSEMBLY . ALSO REPLACED PISTON ,
l i Mod 5 tun: 78E 006 RING SLEEVE AND REED SWITCHES . INSTALLED VALVE AND TESTED OK . ! I Mod Id: PWOW94007540 , 94007464 , 94007694 / HD0 l ystem CFD Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Cool CE Utl Sys: LPSI/SC FPLSLS2 VALVE V 3134 00: 09/27/95 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER A CONTROL ROOM 10: 11/16/95 - OPERATOR REPORTED THAT V 3134 ( CHECK VALVE FOR LPS! (LOW PRESSURE l Appl: SAFETY INJECTION) FEED NEADER ) WAS LEAKlWG BY THE SEAT AS [VIDENCED 0:sc: BY INCREASING PRESSURE ON A PRESSURE CAUGE ON THE 'OTHER' LPS! MEADER
. THERE SHOULD BE NO PRESSURE INDICATED ON THE OTHER LPS! HEADER ,
Func: THIS DEGRADED 910F 2 TRAINS OF LPSI , BUT HAD NO EFFCT ON THE PLANT . Disc AN INBODY BLUE CHECK WAS UNSATISFACTORY . Cause: THE CAUSE OF UNSAT BLUE CHECK 15 UNKNOWN , POSSIBLY DUE TO NORMAL Mfr: W120 Westinghouse Elec Corp / Hagan WEAR . J Nun: 06000CS88000C7 Action: THE DISC WAS LAPPED AND THE SEAT WAS POLISHED . A SECOND BLLE Mod Id: CHECK WAS SAT!$ FACTORY . ( W0#95026965 ) TKM ! System: CFD Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Cool CE l Utl Sys: LPSI/SC i l i
EPRG04AA Nucicir Plant Rillability D ta System Failuro trist Report Run Date: 02/25/ % Sy: Unit ID vilue, Utility Component ID, Failurs Discovery D:t2 Job Kueer: 7370 _ Uni t_ , Comp, ,_, Utility Component id _ _ Dates Narratives . LS2 VALVE V 3469 00: 11/16/95 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS SMUT DOWN FOR A REFUEllWG OUTAGE AND DURING A
, ID: 01/29/% SPECIAL INSPECTION ( DUE TO A SISTER VALVE FAILURE ) IT WAS DISCOVERED tppl: THAT V-3469 ( RELIEF VALVE TO QUENCH TANK FROM LOOP 28 SDC (SHUTDOWN Disc: COOLING) RETURN ) HAD AN UNSATISFACTORY SEAT LEAK AT 1500 PSI ( SN0ut0 BE No SEAT LEAKAGE SEFORE 2250 PSI ) . THIS DEGRADED 10F 2 TRAINS OF '
Fme: / SHUTDOWN COOLING BUT HAD NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . 0:se: 7 Cause THE CAUSE OF SEAT LEAKAGE WAS DUE TO A BENT STEM AND SOME MINOR b3 SCRATCHES ON THE N0ZZEL AND DISC . Mfr: C710 Crosby Valve & Gage Co Action: A NEW STEM WAS INSTALLED , THE N0Z2EL ANO DISC WERE LAPPED . Mod Nun: JR WR-S V 3469 WAS TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL ( Wof95031497 ) TEM Mod Id: STYLE JR 6 System: CFD Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Cool CE Utl Sys: LPSI/SC FPLSLS2 VALVE V-3482 00: 10/24/95 Dese: WHILE THE P_LANT WAS SHUTDOWN FOR A REFUELING OUTAGE AND DURING A 5 10: 01/25/96 YEAR PLAN IST ( IN SERVICE TEST )-li WAS DISCOVERED THAT V 3482 ( Appl: RELIEF VALVE TO QUENCH TANK FROM LOOP 2A 0F SDC (SHUTDOWN COOLING) ) D sc: ,e WOULD NOT LIFT AT THE PROPER SET POINT ( 16% HIGH ) ._TMISDEGRADEM
,) 0F 2 TRAINS OF SHUTDOWN COOLING . THERE WAS NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT .
Func Dssc: [ C M THE CAUSE OF THE UNACCEPTABLE PERFORMANCE OF V 3482 WAS A FAULTT SPRING ( PIECE PART ) . THE SPRlWG APPEARED SLIGHTLY DIST0RTED AND OUT OF ROUNO . Mfr: C710 Crosby Valve & Gage Co Action: THE VALVE WAS RESUILT , WHICH INCLUDED A NEW SPRING , V 3482 WAS Mod tun: JR-WR S TESTED AND RETURNED To NORMAL . ( WO*95013042 ) ( STARS 951577 ) TKM Mod Id: STYLE JR ratem: CFD Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Cool CE Utl Sys: LPSI/SC FPLSLS2 VALVE V 3495 DD: 10/25/95 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS SHUTDOWN FOR A REFUELING OUTAGE A CONTROL ROOM ID: 01/31/96. OPERATOR REP 0fffiD THAT VMONRCTT0er SYSTEM RECIRC TO RVT Appl: (REFUELING WATER TANK) ) WAS LEAKING SY THE SEAT . THE RWT LEVEL WAS Dssc: DECREASING 8ACK THRU THE 'A' HEADER . WHEN THIS VALVE WAS ISOLATED THE
/ RWT LEVEL STASILIZED . THIS DEGRADED 1 0F 4 TRAINS OF RWT SUCTION
~
Func: / PATHS . THERE WAS No EffECT ON THE PLANT , Dsse: Cause: UPON DISASSEMOLT OF THE VALVE IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THERE WAS L,. ' ROLLED METAL' IN THE SEATING AREA 0F THE MAIN DISC WHICH CAUSED THE stf r: 1020 - Target Rock Corp d Nun: 76R 001 g[
\
VALVE 10 LEAK BY . THE CAUSE OF ROLLED METAL IS UNKNOWN . Action: A SKIM CUT WAS MADE CN THE MAlW DISC AND ON THE PILOT DISC . THE Mod Id: VALVE ( V 3495 ) WAS REASSEMBLED , TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Woe 95030269 ) TKM System: CFD Low Press safety inject / Shutdown Cool-CE Utl Sys: LPSI/SC l l 1 _ _ - _ - - _ _ _ _ - _l
I xPRG04AA Kueletr Plant estiability Dats System Failuro Bri:f Report Run Dat: 02/24/96 By: Unit ID v Lue, Utility Component ID, Failur3 Discovery D ts Job Mueer 7370 Unit _,, _ Comp, _ Utility Ccaponent Id.,_ _ Dates Narratives LS2 VALVE V 3641 DO: 09/14/95 Deses WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT SLIGHTLY REDUCED Pl0WER , FOR
- 10: 01/31/ % WATER BOK CLEANING , A CONTROL ROOM OPERATOR REPORTED THAT V-3641 (
Appl CONTROL VALVE FOR Sif (SAFETY INJECTION TANK) 282 FILL & DRAIN ) WAS LEAKING BY THE SEAT AND CAUSING THE 282 SIT TO FILL UP , THIS MAKES IT Desc: NECESSARY TO ISOLATE V 3641. THE OVERFILLING _OF AN Sif NAS NO TRAIN Fmc: OR SYsf M EFFFET . THERE WAS N g0CN THE PLANT . Desc: Cause: UPON DISASSEMBLY OF THE VALVE IT WAS' DISCOVERED THAT THERE WERE
,Y ' SCORE MARKS' ACROSS THE SEAT TNAT COULD MAVE BEEN DUE TO A FORIGN Kfr: F130 Fisher Controls Co Inc MATERIAL BEING ON THE SEAT DURING A CLOSE CYCLE .
. Mod Num: 667 ES Actions THE VALVE WAS REASSEMBLED USING A NEW PLUG AND STEM ASSEMBLY AND f l Mod Id: DESIGN ES hU( A NEW SEAT RING . THE VALVE WAS TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOW 95025589 ) ( Wo#95025584 ) TKM I System: CFD -Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Cool CE l Utl Sys LPSI/SC l l FPLSLS2 VALVE V 3688 00: 03/01/94 Dese: DURING A BENCH FLOW LIFT TEST OF SHUT DOWN HEAT EXCHANGER RELIEF ID: 08/22/95 VALVE < V 3688 ) IT WAS FOUND THAT THE VALVE LIFTED HIGH ( 545 PSIG ) Appl: . WITM THE UN!T OFF LINE AND BECAUSE THE VALVE WAS NOT CHALLANGED Desc: WHILE INSTALLED IN THE SYSTEM , AND THE UNIT WAS OFF LINE FOR Funca M,f REFUELING AND INSPECTION , THERE WA$ pEECL.ON THE PLANT OR SYSTEM Disc: Cause: THE MOST PR08ABLE CAUSE OF FAILURE WAS DUE TO A STICKING VALVE Mfr: C710 Crosby Valve & Gage Co f SEAT CONDITION . NICKS WERE ALSO NOTED ON THE SEAT AND DISC ASSEM8LY Action: THE SEAT ANO DISC WERE LAPPED , AND THE VALVE WAS REASSEM8 LED Mod Nue: JB 35*TD WR S AND TESTED . NCR#2 564 WOW 94004998 HD0 Mod Id: STYLE JS yttem: CFD Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Cool CE Utl Sys: LPSI/SC
)
1 FPLSLS2 VALVE V 3733 00: 04/07/94 Dese: WITH THE UNIT DOWN FOR REFUELING AND INKPECTION , IT WAS FOUNO BT 10: 03/02/95 OPERATORS ENG NORMAL OPERATOR DUTIES THAT VENT VALVE ( V 3733 ) FOR Appl: THE 2A2 SAFETY INJECTION TANK WOULD NOT OPEN , AS NO CMANGE IN I Disc: POSITION INDICAfl0N WAS NOTED . THIS DEGRADED ONE FLOW PATH OF THE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM , BUT DID NOT AFFECT THE INTENDED FUNCTION OF Fmc M, THE SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM OR PLANT . Discs / Cause: THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS NOT KNOWN , THERE WAS NO ROOT CAUSE g DETERMINAfl0N MADE AT THl$ TIME . Efra T020 Target Rock Corp Q1 Action: THE VALVE WAS CUT OUT AND REPLACED WITH A SPARE . UPON TESTING 4 Mun 808 001 f jf THE VALVE WAS RESTORED TO ITS NORMAL SERVICE . H00 PWOW94007986 Mod Id: L Systems CFD Low Press Safety Inject / Shutdown Cool CE j Utl Sys: LPSI/SC 1 l
Nuclear Plant R:llability DLt3 System F;iluro Bri f Report AmOm: 02/24/ % *
%PRG04AA By: Unit 1D v;tue, Utility Component ID, F;ituro Discovery Dits Job Number: 7370
, Uni t_ ,,C ong,,, _ Utility Component Id.,,,,, _ Dates Warratives
'.52 VALVE V 3735 00: 01/06/93 Dese: DURING WORMAL OPERATOR DUTIES IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT 2A1 SAFETY v ID: 05/24/93 INJECTION TANK VENT VALVE V 3735 WAS LEAKING SY THE SEAT . TNE LEAK Appt: WAS MINOR A W DID NOT CAUSE_A $1GNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE IN SERVICE
- SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM OR PLANT .
Dxc: Cause: TME CAUSE OF TME FAILURE WAS UNKNOWN BUT FASTER TMAN NORMAL IEAR OF THE SEAT AND DISC ASSEMBLY WERE EXPERIENCED . Funct Action: THE VALVE WAS CUT mfT Amp REPLACED T TN A'LIKE FOR LIKE SPARE . Descs , PWOf93000462 / MD0 Mfra T020 Target Rock Corp Mod Nun: 88T 001 Mod Id: System CFD Low Press Safety inject /Shutdcun Coot CE Utt Sys LPSI/SC FPLSLS2 VALVE V 3736 DD: 01/06/93 Dese: DURING NORMAL OPERATOR DUTIES IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT 2A1 SAFETY 10: 05/24/93 INJECTION TANK VENT VALVE V 3736 WAS LEAKING B1 THE SEAT . THE LEAK Appt: WAS MINOR AND DID NOT W SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE IN SERVICE Disc: SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM OR PLANT . Cause: THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE WAS UNKNOWN BUT FASTER TMAN NORMAL WEAR Func: OF THE SEAT AND DISC ASSEMBLY WERE EXPERIENCED . 05te: Action: THE VALVE WAS CUT CUT AND REPLACED WITH A LIKE FOR LIKE SPARE . g PWo#93000461 / HD0 54f r: T020 Target Rock Corp r god rus: 88T 001 cod id:
/ stem: CFD -Low Press Safety inject / Shutdown Coot CE Utt Sys: LP$l/SC FPLSLS2 VALVE V 3739 DD: 01/06/93 Dese: DURING WORMAL OPERATOR DUTIES IT WAS DISCOVERED ' MAT 282 SAFETY 10: 05/24/93 . INJECTION TANK VENT VALVE V 3739 WAS LEAKING SY THE SEAT . THE LEAK WAS MINOR AND ID NOT A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE IN SERVICE Appl:
D:se: SAFETY INJECTION SYSTEM OR PLANT . Cause: THE CAUSE WAS UNKNOWN BUT ABNORMAL WEAR OF 7,HE SEAT AND DISC Fme: ASSEMBLY WERE THE SUSPECTED . Dsse Action: THE VALVE WAS CUT OUT AND REPLACED WITH A LIKE FOR LIKE SPARE . PW0e93000411 / HD0 f Xfr: 1020 - Target Rock Corp J tunt 88T 001 Mod id: System: CFD -Low Press Saf ety inject / Shutdown Cool-CE Uti Sys: LPSl/SC l I L
6 NTRGd4AA Zucigar Plant R2 Liability Data System Failure Brisf Report Run D:t:: 02/24/ % By: Unit ID vclue, Utility Component ID, Failure Discovery Dits Job Nuuber: 7370 I Unit _ _Come, __ Utility Component Id_ ,_ Dates Narratives
'LS2 VALVE V 3739 DD: 04/09/94 Desc: WHILE THE UNIT WAS PREPARING TO FINISH A REFtst f uc OUTAGE , !
., ID: 10/19/94 OPERATIONS 70UND THAT SAFETY INJECTION TANK 282 VENT VALVE ( V 3739 ) I Appli WOULD NOT OPEN THE FAILURE WAS FOUND DURING THE PROCESS OF FILLING i AND VENTING WHERE THE REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM l$ CLOSED AND PREPARED l l D:sc:
FOR PRESSURIZATION AND MEATUP . THERE ARE 2 VENT VALVES AVAILABLE FOR j l THE 282 SAFETY INJECTION TAME , 50 THE SAVETY INJECTION SYSTEM WAS j i Func: D:se: (( UNAFFECTED . M0 WEVER , TNlt ALONG WITN OTHER PROBLEMS DELAYED THE FILL AND VENT pro d DURE AND KEPT THE UNIT FROM STARTING UP UNTIL THE ITEMS l I Mf ra T020 Target Rock Corp WERE RESTORED TO NORMAL l l f ! Mod Cun: 88T 001 Cause THE MOST PROSASLE CAUSE OF FAILURE WAS SINDlWG AND STICKING DUE MM Id TO WORN STEM , SEAT AND DISC ASSEMSLIES . Action: THE VALVE WAS REPLACED WITH A LIKE FOR LIKE SPARE . UPoh TESTING System: CFD Low Press Safety inject / shutdown Cool CE THE VALVE WAS RETURNED TO SERVICE , PWOW94008121 , 94008124 / MD0 Utl Sys: LPSI/SC 1 . j l l i l 1 l l I
l l i 1 i o 1.0 , INTRODUCTION ~ ] Implementation of the NRC Maintenance Rule, in accordance with NUMARC 93-01,
" Industry Guideline for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power l l !
i Plants," requires events having an impact on systems within scope be evaluated to I determine if they are Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures (MPFFs). The following methodology provides guidance to be used when making MPFF decisions. l Figure 1 is provided to assist in MPFF determinations. The intent is that the MPFF ;
! decision making process use the basic causes found on Figure 1 to de%rmine is a Functional Failure is maintenance preventable. Figure 1 was developed to be consistent with the Event Casual Factor Categories found in Appendix A of INPO Good Practice OE-907," Root Cause Analysis."
1 ! 2.0 MPFF Determination Guidelines i ! FUNCTIONAL FAILURES 1 l A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the ruk is not jl capable of performing its intended function. l t intended function is defined as ..the function (s) performed by the SSC,as listed in the MR, that i required its inclusion within the scope of the rule. For SSC's that have Plant Level Performance Criteria such as SCRAMS, the intended function is to not cause a SCRAM. j Failure that results in an event covered under a Plant Level, such as Unplanned Safety System Actuation, would be a functional failure. l Loss of function can be either direct. i.e., the SSC that performs the function fails to perform its ,
- intended function or indirect, i.e., the SSC fails to perform its intended function as a result of another SSC (safety related or non-safety related).
If a functional failure recurs during post maintenance testing but before retuming the SSC's to service, it could be indicative of unacceptable corrective actions but is not considered another functional f ailure. Intended function is further defined as a demand function or run function. A conscious decision to make a function unavailable is not normally a functional failure. Failure to meet a Technical Specification is not automatically a loss of funcbon. An evaluation of the event may find that system design enterion was met even though the TS acceptance enteria was not.
l l 4 Failur,e during a test must be evaluated to determine if the same would have occurred during a true demand or in absence of the test conditions. If so, the failure is a functional failure. Failure of a redundant component is considered a functional failure if the component is 1 of 2, or requires 2 of 3 coinodence. MAINTENANCE PREVENTABLE A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not l capable of performing its intended function and should have been prevented by the performance of maintenance actions by the utility. The cause of the failure is attnbuted to a maintenance-related activity. Maintenance includes not only those activities traditionally associated with identifying and correcting actual or potentially degraded conditions, i.e., repair, surveillance, diagnostic examinations, and preventive measures, but extends to all supporting functions for the conduct of these activities. Examples of Maintenance Preventable: 1
-Implementation of incorrect maintenance prccedures.
incorrect implementation of correct maintenance procedures.
-Incorrect implementation of maintenance performed without procedures considered within the skill of the craft.
-Failures as previously documented by Operating Experience that wuld have been produded ;
by an appropriate and timely maintenance activity. l
-Failure to perform maintenance activities that are normal and appropriate to the equipment l function and importance.
Examples that are not Maintenance Preventable:
-initial failures due to OEM design and manufacturing including initial electronic piece part earty failures.
-initial failures due to design inadequacies in selecting or applying commercial or "off the shelf' designed equipment.
-Initial f ailures due to inherent material defects.
-Operational errors and extemal or initiating events.
-intentional run to failure.
Corrective maintenance based on the Pass / Fail of a surveillance test is not considered a MPFF unless the equipment could not have performed its function, e.g., check valve leak rate i
1 1 l test. Although the component has exceeded a defined condition, maintenance is only l perfo'rmed once that condition is exceeded. ; l Components being out of si,6c#wi;on (e.g. breaker trip times) is not considered a MPFF unless the equipment could not have performed its funcbon Packing leakage is not a MPFF unless the equipment could not perform its function. Mmor leaks will be considered MPFF's if the valve function is to prevent radiological releases. Functional failure of a component that can be demonstrated to be a first time event (plant and industry) and the plant had no reasonable way of expecting an occurrence (vendor manual or related experience), will not be tallied as an MPFF against a Performance Criterion. However, it will be tallied as part of the repeat MPFF count. , Refer to Figure 1, MPFF Program Areas and Basic Causes, for the determination of Maintenance Preventable based on functional failure basic cause. i l _.)
! t 1 . i i t ,l 1 ' ,[- ;!: ~, a ,; ifi ;;,[ [! ;f,$ ,t. , ! >L
. 0 a
n a _ m'- a e 3 r . m
=
m a t e ;_ M m a
..* 'r l
_=M8w 'e
- _ ns ..
e lc
- o. i. - h.-
,"=
s= "
- e W',e.,e. m ..
s 1_ -
. e o E' ==. se
~e,o- B
_ - m t s _ C _m _a7 s,'"= ns - s . - . Mc S_ _ nO'** e^ ee es n .
. . e oed t
_ Nt a
~1
~
- i ee l c r l , - I u aR ace m -
^ m u -
t e% _ . r c r. e p . h n e o.i t m
., a o Z. .'m o.
. ' '7 pvu s eaan
- ",, . sn ee A t
.n u _ st un m a
- e.
_ a_ r s aia r g o S _s e w P r E . ge%m.CM S i_ U e ,
. _-:e -
A e. , . me,._ l , _ C
~
~
m c e. ._ gw _. - C . _ _e. ug -
,,a i
.,iu..
I _ S _ .te A ~ W . B D & N 'l 1 N . EA ,
=. ew e n
f o,s
=o f
a e . RS ' [j w r. o.,
- wg
.r .r u
s UA 1__* - rag w -7 e p. l e e
- - o- - r _
c s GE R . n -
= g.
y I FA . _ e ., w .
==
a .g_ i c a
=
=
m-m
.s i
n a u a ) S e = i kr. nC e M e. - _ -
- ,t _
d _ A ted ne C O _ R t - t G G . _
- iaa I P
O ~ _
. - g
. Mle .
R g R P ~
- g g
g e M (
..- m_e
" D
,, n F
l
~ " a s -e m "
e m_ F - s i m m - 0" __ _ m ur _n n P - _ __.sas o s _'_pesc_ a t sn d Ou w. we. _m a g _ T ,_sm_ M T" E P u ep ree e e
~
.-. ._ %s .mg l h j , :
~m ,--
v _.o .
-2
{- Wm;_.e .m wos , -
, g e,
O P - r m N = . p ,,
== a s
i
- msee -
. , m b s m =
= a_ ,
, Q,msa. i I _ _ _o_l p
Fuamms: i. te = c ^ _w h m=- -.
- e. w e
gr p ^ us .=- -
- D a
u _Dse. t se n m m_t,,Dp n 7 s. a i _o 1hr a F l; l t Ill. ,I i . l , l1
f i
- l F.TGaPE Ytd d (tXA M PL E I, SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR #r_ - ,
I SSC: 9b - Auxiliary Feedwater Status:(a)(2) Updated: 14 March,1996 j 2 j Performance Monitorina Period: Previous 12 months for OOS hrs & LERs,36 months for all others.
~
) ! Performance Criteria: 5 Unavailability: U1& U2 <88 hrs /yr per A&B train,168 hrs /yr per C train (OOS hrs - 12 month period) Reliability: 51 Repetative MPFFs, and 52 unrelated MPFFs per train,36 month period. PLPC 3: 51 unplanned and LER reportable ESF actuations last 12 months. (Extudes AFAS) l UNAVAfLABILITY: _ *yysw-r-n.~ _; - -
~y ;
+y y
. 7. ,' ;" T **:':: p ;g,
' . , _ ;,. J ' .a
,: ,,,;,. . , g. . . ' .
.a .. r n~.....,.
i :. x,ucaw. .. m s. . Nt . ; ::. : .~
.9;;
= ..
.m- mammmmmmmmmmme M- agg
--REAllABILITY: List all train failures, corrective actions and MPFFs (attach ADM 17.08 Figs, STARS, etc.)
2C AFWtrain 2/27/93 - SE-09-4 grounded by water intrusion, valve may not have stroked during valid demand. 3/13/96 - SE-09-4 failure to open dunng surveillance testing. Cause due to intermittent keyswitch fault. (Root Cause Report SCE 96-10) 11/6/95 - MV-09 Broken torque switch discovered during testing. Possible MPFF. 9/20/95 - MV-08-3 trip hook and latching lever indicated excessive wear causing a tnp of the mech over speed trip mechanism. Loss of 1 of 3 trains AFW. Cause appears to be normal wear. Possible MPFF 9/15/95 - CKT BKR 60903 for MV-0813 shorted due to water intrusion causing loss of 1 of 3 trains of AFW. Switch was replaced, new gasket installed on junction door. Possible MPFF. 2A AFW train 3/1/94 - 2A AFW motor breaker would not close due to broken cottor pin. Possible MPFF PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE CRITERIA-0 Unplanned LER reportable ESF actuations for the past 3 years Trends: 2B AFW -(35.8 hrs unavail. Aug 95) caused Q3 95 spike. 2C AFW -(51.5 hrs unavail. Sep 95 due to corrective maintenance) reason for Q3 95 spike. 4 functional failures (not all maintenance preventable) on C AFW train in past 3 years. Recent aoolicable Industry information: INPO SER 4-95," Terry Turbine Govemor (Woodward) Valve Stem Binding"
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR l SSC: Status:(a)( ) Updated: e 1 l Performance Monitorina Period: l l Performance Criteria: Unavailability:, Reliabilrty: PLPC ' - - - - - - - - . __ _ _ _ _ _. I i UNAVAILABILITY- l l l 1 I l I l RELIABILITY: l I PLANT !.EVEL PERFORMANCE-l t Trends I Recent aoolicable Industry information: i
. REvlDRAET 2 PQoCEDUNMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAGE:
THE MAINTENANCE RULE 30 of 36 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
"" d6D"N.TiB ST. LUCIE PLANT FIGURE 4 (Page 1 of 2)
Goal Setting and Monitoring Unit: 1 2 Date: Risk Significant: 0 Yes 0 No SSC: Reason for Goal Setting: i Performance Criteria Not Met ! Which criteria were not met? i Description of Events: l 1 Repetitive MPFF (attach Figure 3 for each failure) l Explain how failures are repetitive. t Were previous corrective actions inadequate? References (attach): Does this SSC require (a)(1) status? O Yes o No System Owner l Yes - signature of Expert Panel Member Maintenance Rule Coordinator No - signature and reason why not Expert Panel Chairman
7tEVIDRAET 2 PXOCEcudMRtEMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAGE. , THE MAINTENANCE RULE 31 of 36 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
" d6W.I8 ST. LUCIE PLANT
'd
. FIGURE 4 (Page 2 of 2)
Goal Setting and Monitoring (continued) Root Cause Analysis: Assigned to: Corrective Actions and Responsibilities: Assigned to: 1. 2. 3. 4. Goal Setting and Monitoring: For each corrective action, there should be a goal to be attained that shows the action was correct, monitoring for a follow-up period to verify success, and a discussion to show how PSA and industrywide operating experience were used in the process. Goal Monitoring method & frequency Date PSA/ Industry Exp
- 1. 1.
- 2. 2.
- 3. 3.
- 4. 4.
Prepared by: System Owner Date Review and Concurrence: Maintenance Rule Coordinator Date Review and Approved: Expert Panel Chairman Date
l Pn m version: 0 . Corrective A ctio n Form PMAI Site:2.SL Source Number: PM9643-528 Document: WALCHESK1 PMAI REO Originator:SCE Due Date: 3/29/96 i Aseigned l Deptad SCE SCE/SWIATEK Q
. Implementor Name Unit Outage Mode SNO NCR OWA
Description:
AS A MAINT. RULE IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITY, A 3 YR HISTORICAL REVIEW OF SSC'S WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE MAINT. RULE WAS PERFORMED TO ID POTENTIAL FUNCTIONAL FAILURES. NPRDS/ PASSPORT DATA REQUIRES FURTHER EVAL; REVIEW AND ID MAINTENANCE , PREVENTABLE FUNCTIONAL FAILURES CASES; LIST OCCURENCES ON, OR ATTACH TO SSC l PERFORMANCE INDICATOR. EX1 GUIDANCE ATTACHED. LPSI:10 ANY REPEAT MPFF'S (SAME CAUSE) OCCUR. REVIEW RESULTS WITH SSC PERFORMANCE
- f'DfTEDIA tr AMV DF tR FYPFpngn f*fMADI FTC Fin A l j Acceptance Section l Status / Comments
I understand and accept responsibility of the above listed action and due date Department Manager Signature l Due Date Extension / Transfer Responsibthty Hequests j Appvd By Extend To Date Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Onginator/Date Manager /Date extena to vate Mequest oy Ivate supervisor /vate ' unginator/vate Manager /pate Reasons: Appvd By XPLH Resp.To Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Manager /Date Reopent/Date Reasons: j Completion Sectionl Completion Date: C!ose-Out Documents: Comments: Completed By: / Date: Revewed By- / Date: i Approved By: / Date: l Revewed By- / Date: i l
1 - e .-
- ST. LUCIE ACTION REPORT pg fs+1%-03-52 7 1
4 ADEhiroCA110NM ' = Does 6 a 19 I'rL yy j ParaorWDepartmartinbladna N.hlAce#ssk//CoE 1/2-4 . < Unit Syneem LPs / ComponentID \/A4-io.= l As A Attsw~ ~ 9m.s lawn asn -,.rn ru ns&mwry; A 3 innt.m g,S ,, Atarma.oese fossarw of s'$t*.a wirMano -r-an L=-anr of rnar afne - -=e Ruar war Anet_~ m .re In nw F-..=.nse Lacedon PSL ! K~e_wrs- - F1,t - h +a is A/pror ,er PAssAw.r- Cperamerisorkemind RWA wawAA ~= G w n2--.m w Aue> 1sc->s-J -nkuar e.aser rohne a R " M ar. % s w m nis.:ar=,,w~ y p E fnsunaras 4 Fuw2 p Gew . Ano Luc em If Yes, requires NPS notulandon f occ-vutoscas oa. , ;,,. wn -w sse. Pain as,="lastuase Name of NPS Nodned 4 ( E~M PLP M b {n vl6 M C A W ~ E On, NRC Conospondonos I, AucSt Report, E Refemnoes Drasing #, pwoonnel observadm etc.) - h AbM l'1. o B . ' loup > ~nwrwrua os; locFK '50.t.r. T7le Wm-r.::.= IN CFAL 60.t,Q. AfonrAu 48.c l ~ Acdono
- 1. Were any slope taken 'o rnitigese? Yes No
- 2. What were they and were swy wo Udrae wA/
- 3. Se amuse of condition r known. une eseus
- 4. Recommendedon to conoot and depenment sospanotda.h5 fen A&ve- /Wsrawsroar d. Swerer sce m.
.~
I Department Head SW= b k Dale 3 i 2 o i 96 D , ,,, ,,,oi,, ,,,,,,,, ,, ,,,,,, g y , wo 1
'1 REVIEW / APPROVAL x l
- 1. Assigned Department. .S M
- 2. RootCause . j NP-700 Plant Problem Report IrwestFJane and Conect Technical Sutaommmee Revow Required Operabaty Assessment Required: JPN '
OPS C SCE g 3. Nudear Network Yes C No gL 4N 1 2 3 4 5 is item a rnode hold? 1 2 3 3/1750 4 5 Trein Swap Pnorty hU b Yes No C Required Commitment Date: S / 781 1 Asegned Outa08. Comments: , I i Shnettre Dess f I De you requre approvalto close? O Yes O No
'en l 148 Event trutietor Code Syneem Code CausalFacsor Code o
(t318-2KWPG) , (Rev.3- 1995)
t IPMAl[orm Version: 0 Co rrective Action Form u PMAl Site:ESL Source Number. PM96-03 535 Document: WALCHESEl PMAl REOOriginator:SCE Due Date: 3/29/96 Assigned Deptartmort: SCE SCE/WACHTEL M. 2 Implementor Name Unit Outage Mode SNO NCR OWA
Description:
AS A MAINT. RULE IMPLEMENTATION ACTMTY, A 3 YR HISTORICAL REVIEW OF SSC'S WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE MAINT. RULE WAS PERFORMED TO ID POTENTIAL FUNCTIONAL FAILURES. [ NPRDS/ PASSPORT DATA REQUIRES FURTHER EVAL: REVIEW AND ID MAINTENANCE . PREVENTABLE FUNCTIONAL FAILURES CASES: LIST OCCURENCES ON, OR ATTACH TO S$C ! PERFORMANCE INDICATOR. EX1 GUIDANCE ATTACHED. H2 RECOM8:lO ANY REPEAT MPFF'S (SAME CAUSE) OCCUR. REVIEW REF i IS WITH SSC DCDClinua FC PDITEDIA tr AMV Df' IC Cif f'CFMCM f'fMADt FTP rit? J l Acceptance Section Status / Comments: , i understand and accept responsibility of the above listed action and due date Department Manager Signature l Due Date Extensionaransfer Responsibility Requests l . Extend To Date Request by /Date supervsor/Date Onginator/Date Manager /Date Appvd By extena io uste Mequest oy Ivate, supervoortuate vnginator/vate Manager /vate Reasons: . i Appvd By XPtK Resp. To Request by /Date Supervisor / dew Manager /Date Recipent/Date Reasons: l l Completion Sectionl Completion Date: 9'h/7G Close4ut Documents: Comments: NO MLl/ff EddAsr:DJ Completed By: M M / Date: O MP l Revewed By: / 6 - 1 --- MC' C- Date: i d Approved By: / N6 M" Nt' Date: N Revewed By: / 8 M Date: I TS
%J l I
- - - - .~ . _. .- . ._ .- . . _ ~ ~ - . _ - . . . . . _ . . _ _ . _ - - ~ .- -.
s' l 02/24/96 PASSPORT REPORTING SYSTEM Page: 9 l t 8 PASS 3300 St. Lucie Plant Report Writer 11.14.01 l i WON: 95020850 1A Units 02 Pris A3 Status: 85 WR# Orig. Dept: PWO#: 8357 Sys: 27 Orig Date: 12/07/95 Asgn To: WKTP: 5 Comp Tag #: H2 RCOMBNR 2B Assoc: ASME XI: N , Desc: KYDROGEN RECOMBINER 2B (75 KVA) , Loc Desc: RCB/62/S 49/E-18 l Requests i Hold: Crew: Shift: Dept: ELEC Plan Id: RGM0JPG T & B: N Unit Cond 6 PCM N/A Def Tag: Def Tag Locs NPRDS: I Start: 12/07/95 / 19:00 End 12/09/95 / 23:59 Age: 79 ! Work Descs .
*** STOP THINK . OPERATE . PROVE *** i THE PURPOSE OF THIS NPWO IS TO TROUBLESHOOT AND 3EPAIR GROUND ON 2B HYDROGEN RECOMBINER .
. I CDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCD l C VERIFY THAT YOU ARE ON THE CORRECT UNIT AND COMPONENT PRIOR TO >
i Trouble Found / Work Performed l 12/8/95 SWILLEY/KOEHLER/ WATSON /RICHARDS** l INSTALLED BUSSES AS REQUIRED . MEGGERED LEADS 1. 2, 3 AND C. I LEAD #1 600 K.ORMS, #2 390 K OHMS, #3 390 K OHMS, C 790 K OHMS. l STARTED DRILLING 3 SS 10/32 SCREWS OUT BITS WERE NOT CUTTING. STILL l l NEED TO CUT OFF BUS BARS.
**12/7/95 SWILLEY/ MCDONALD MEGGERED FROM CONTROLLER LEADS 1 2 3 0 HEATER, AFTER LIFTING THEM.
! WON: 94006301 01 Units 02 Prit A2 Status: 85 WRN: 94003561 Orig. Dept: TECH PWON: 8652 Sys: 27 i Orig Date: 03/16/94 Asgn To M P: 5 l Comp Tag # V27101 Assoc: ASME XI: N l Desc: CHECK VLV (PENETR P.48B) FOR H2 ANLYZR 2A SAMPLE RETURN TO CN' INT j sc Desci RCB/25/S.69/W.8 Request: EXCESSIVE SEAT LEAKAGE Hold: Crew: Shift: Dept: MECH Plan Id: MMUNIT2 T&B Y Unit Cond 5 PCM 282192M Def Tag: N/A Def Tag Locs N/A NPRDS: Y Start: 03/23/94 / 20:00 End: 03/26/94 / 23:00 Age: 710 Work Desc: ..................................................................... THIS NPWO IS TO REPLACE V27101 AS PER CRN 009-293-4415 OF PC/M # 009-2 9 3.M. ................................................................. UNCONTROLLED COPY FOR REFERENCE ONLY VERIFY WITH CONTROLLED COPY PRIOR TO USE l l i l l l
4 i 6 ! f
1.0 INTRODUCTION
implementation of the NRC Maintenance Rule, in accordance with NUMARC 9301, '
" Industry Guideline for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power ,
Plants," requires events having an impact on systems within scope be evaluated to ! determine if they are Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures (MPFFs). The following methodology provides guidance to be used when making MPFF decmons Figure 1 is provided to assist in MPFF determinations. The intent is that the MPFF decision making process use the basic causes found on Figure 1 to determine is a . Functional Failure is maintenance preventable. Figure 1 was developed to be consistent with the Event Casual Factor Categories found in Appendix A of INPO Good Practice OE-907," Root Cause Analysis." 2.0 MPFF Determination Guidelines FUNCTIONAL FAILURES A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not ! capable of performing its intended function. Intended function is defined as ..the function (s) performed by the SSC,ac listed in the MR, that i required its inclusion within the scope of the rule. For SSC's that have Plant Level Performance Cnteria such as SCRAMS, the intended function is to not cause a SCRAM. Failure that results in an event covered under a Plant Level, such as Unplanned Safety l System Actuation, would be a functional failure. Loss of function can be either direct, i.e., the SSC that performs the function fails to perform its intended function or indirect, i.e., the SSC fails to perform its intended function as a result of another SSC (safety related or non-safety related). , if a functional failure recurs during post maintenance testing but before retuming the SSC's to service, it could be indicative of unacceptable corrective actions but is not considered another functional failure. l l Intended function is further defined as a demand function or run function. A conscious decision to make a function unavailable is not normally a functional failure. l l Failure to meet a Technical Specification is not automatically a loss of function. An evaluation of the event may find that system design enterion was met even though the TS acceptance enteria was not.
l l Failure during a test must be evaluated to determine if the same would have occurred during a true demand or in absence of the test conditions, if so, the failure is a funcbonzi failure. l Failure of a redundant component is considered a functional failure if the component is 1 of 2, or requires 2 of 3 coincidence. i MAINTENANCE PREVENTABLE , l l I l \ ! 1 A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not capable of performing its intended function and should have been orevented by the performance of maintenance actions by the utility. The cause of the failure is attributed to a maintenance-related activity. Maintenance includes not only those activities traditionally associated with identifying and I correcting actual or potentially degraded conditions, i.e., repair, surveillance, diagnostic eweminations, and preventive measures, but extends to all supporting functions for the conduct l of these activities. 1 Examples of Maintenance Preventable:
-Implementation of incorrect maintenance procedures.
-Incorrect implementation of correct maintenance procedures.
-Incorrect implementation of maintenance performed without procedures considered within the skill of the craft.
-Failures as previously documented by Operating Experience that could have been precluded by an appropnate and timely maintenance activity.
-Failure to perform maintenance activities that are normal and appropriate to the equipment function and importance.
l Examples that are not Maintenanca Preventable:
-Initial failures due to OEM design and manufacturing including initial electronic piece part early failures.
-Initial failures due to design inadequacies in selecting or applying commercial or "off the shelf
- designed equipment.
-Initial failures due to inherent material defects.
-Operational errors and extemat or initiating events.
-interttional run to failure.
Corrective maintenance based on the Pass / Fail of a surveillance test is not considered a MPFF unless the equipment could not have performed its funcnon, e.g., check valve leak rate l
r l test. Although the component has exceeded a defined condition, maintenance is only performed once that condition is exceeded. Components being out of specification (e.g. breaker trip times) is not considered a MPFF unless the equipment could not have performed its function. Packing leakage is not a MPFF unless the equipment could not perform its function. Minor leaks will be considered MPFF's if the valve function is to prevent radiological releases. Functional failure of a component that can be demonstrated to be a first time event (plant and industry) and the plant had no reasonable way of expecting an occurrence (vendor manual or related experience), will not be tallied as an MPFF against a Performance Criterion. However, it will be tallied as part of the repeat MPFF count. Refer to Figure 1, MPFF Program Areas and Basic Causes, for the determination of Maintenarice Preventable based on functional failure basic cause. I l l 9
i
~ .
FIGURE 1 MPFF PROGRAM AREAS AND BASIC CAUSES s.-
- e- "
ruriusm== e.use u
" " ' ' ** ,=. _"**""*
- opesumen ar omer te; __- -w c_..-._-- er; - _.
m.ew m r; us -_.1.
- ou se; u--
1 ..-_- .
, 'a= o====*
--,, m """"""* , i.J L-
, 4 on h, m n . ee ., sm , r 5"* an-mem m
,o.m , ec,e
.m. j thseg -__ _ __ >-
o pe, , **o==*'s , em-om -,
, .== op-s e > === 4. ;
suoi --- waseio mea
,,,, m,,, r
**""""P'l 6mp er
> P'emmha- sua ene emne,p 00=D
~~m m
- wm. _ _ . _ _ _ _ ,-
- ,_ , , howeeper ,e,,,,,,
'N Wb g f h P48emm mde ,D) tambermari .emePeemmed as femamunet bM
,- s==.-= eom c=*==r suoi n=i.
poi ___ , -% , = - , - r e===A -
- o. -. - - -
n,.,, . o, e,enemome- a . co,. e a emi . t
,- _--% > Oa.wo== ._ ,
e-mus e rt umas vers ,_
- me==w e==e. , e sim i
, - .w. ,wu
- soima== w - ---
M merum paa emm6 pee as mean a, emesseure deep e,i,mm.,opensis
***'*"* 4'4B -g
- "--- -. t . ,
. , ,,,,, ,Lg_
&- - tee on-mem o===
7 * , r -~ ! arms pouremmen enj doj
- asamnemit un -----g l osumme pace ;
,e ,
-- , u-aa i
* *"" " m Maintenance Causes that are Not
> *=a m a ==
o=======
, ar .*---==
o- --. son, Related Causes Maintenance Related ! P'88* M e __
- WM bung i runweg se W"* M (SetDple COdee) e. - .Arese l' . Basicc= ===
f l l I l
frGuPE Twd (EXAirlPLE l. SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR --g_.. - SSC: 9b - Auxiliary Feedwater Status:(a)(2) Updated: 14 March,1996 j Performance Monitorina Period: Previous 12 months for OOS hrs & LERs,36 months for all others. 1 l Performance Criteria: Unavailability: U1& U2 <88 hrs /yr per A&B train,168 hrs /yr per C train (OOS hrs - 12 month period) Reliability: 51 Repetative MPFFs, and 5 2 unrelated MPFFs per train,36 month period. PLPC 3: 51 unplanned and LER reportable ESF actuations last 12 months. (Ex!udes AFAS) l UNAVAILABILITY: 2 l *.! 1 ' s . , , , i , . . P. c k ...N a. , j : l i I M M ~.-- - g
- m. '
n em: >- . g _q l REALIABILITY: List all train failures, corrective actions and MPFFs (attach ADM 17.08 Figs, STARS, etc.) 2C AFWtrain i 2127/93 - SE-09-4 grounded by water intrusion, valve may not have stroked during valid demand. l 3/13/96 - SE-09-4 failure to open dunng surveillance testing. Cause due to intermittent keyswitch fault. (Root i Cause Report SCE 96-10) 11/6/95 - MV-09 Broken torque switch discovered during testing. Possible MPFF. 9/20/95 - MV-08-3 tnp hook and latching lever indicated excessrve wear causing a trip of the mech over speed tnp mechanism. Loss of 1 of 3 t ains AFW. Cause appears to be normal wear. Possible MPFF 9/15/95 - CKT BKR 60903 for MV-08-13 shorted due to water intrusion causing loss of 1 of 3 trains of AFW. Switch was replaced, new gasket installed on junction door. Possible MPFF. 2A AFW train 3/1/94 - 2A AFW motor breaker would not close due to broken cottor pin. Possible MPFF PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE CRITERIA-0 Unplanned LER reportable ESF actuations for the past 3 years Trends: 2B AFW-(35.8 hrs unavail. Aug 95) caused Q3 95 spike. 2C AFW-(51.5 hrs unavail. Sep 95 due to corrective maintenance) reason for Q3 E5 spike. 4 functional failures (not all maintenance preventable) on C AFW train in past 3 years. - Recent aoolicableJr,dustry Information: INPO SER 4-95,
- Terry Turbine Govemor (Woodward) Valve Stem Binding *
, . - . ~ . . . _ . - . __ _.- .- . - - . . _ - _ - _ . _ - . . . - . . . - . ._ _
t . ( SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: Status:(a)( ) Updated: l Performance Monitoris:n Period: Performance Criteria: Unavailability-Reliability; , PLPC j l 1 1 UNAVAILABillTY- ! i l i l RELIABILITY-I l i l 4 I PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-i t I l Trands: i Recent applicable Industry Information:
O REVIDRAET 2 PRoCEDU44RifMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAGE: THE MAINTENANCE RULE 30 of 36 ,
" ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE "d8EiY.IB ST. LUCIE PLANT FIGURE 4 (Page 1 of 2)
Goal Setting and Monitoring Unit: 1 2 Date: Risk Significant: 0 Yes 0 No SSC: Reason for Goal Setting: Performance Criteria Not Met Which criteria were not met? Description of Events: Repetitive MPFF (attach Figure 3 for each fai'ure) l Explain how failures are repetitive. l Were previous corrective actions inadequate?
.t References (attach):
Does this SSC rcquire (a)(1) status? O Yes s No System Owner . Yes - signature of Expert Panel Member Maintenance Rule Coordinator No - signature and reason why not Expert Panel Chairman 1 I
.' . l 1
l e REVIDRAEiT 2 Pl;OCEDudMRtEMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAGE: THE MAINTENANCE RULE 31 of 36 ,
' I ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
"" EN. lib ST, LUCIE PLANT l l
FIGURE 4 l * (Page 2 of 2) Goal Setting and Monitoring (continued) l Root Cause Analysis: Assigned to: 1 l Corrective Actions and Responsibilities: Assigned to: 1. 2. 3. I
- 4. 1 Goal Setting and Monitoring: For each corrective action, there should be a goal to be attained that shows the action was correct, monitoring for a follow-up period to verify success, and a discussion to show how PSA and industrywide I operating experience were used in the process. 4 Goal Monitoring method & frequency Date N PSA/ Industry Exp
- 1. 1.
1
- 2. 2.
- 3. 3. l 1
- 4. 4. l l
Prepared by. I System Owner Date l Review and Concurrence: Maintenance Rule Coordinator Date i l Review and Approved: Expert Panel Chairman Date
PMAl Form Version: 0
- C_o r r e c t i v e A c t i o n F o r m PMAI Site:ESL Sou.*.e Number: PM96-03-540 Docunent: WALCHESKI PMAl REQOriginator:SCE Due Date: 3/29/96 Assigneil Deptartment: Q$I OST/SCISCENTE. R. 2 implementor Name Unit Outage Mode SNO NCR OWA
Description:
MAINT. RULE WAS PERFORMED TO ID POTENTIAL FUNCTIONAL FAILURES. NPRDS/ PASSPORT DATA REOUIRES FURTHER EVAL; REVIEW AND 10 MAINT. PREVENTABLE FUNCTIONAL FAILURES CASES; LIST OCCURENCES ON, OR ATTACH TO SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR. EXJGUIDANCE ATTACHED. l CONT. PENETRATIONS:1D ANY REPEAT MPFFS (SAME CAUSE) OCCUR. REVIEW RESULTS WITH SSC PERFORMANCE CRITERIA. IF ANY PC IS EXCEEDED COMPLETE FIO 4. l Acceptance Section [ l Status / Comments: I understand and accept responsibility of the above listed action and due date Department Manager Signature l Due Date Extensionaransfer Responsibility Requests l Extend To Date Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Onginator/Date Manager /Date txteno uivate ' Kequest oy IvaF dupervisorivatr vnginatosivate managerivate Reasons: Appvd By XPER Resp. To Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Manager /Date Recipient /Date Reasons: [Cornpletion Sectiori] Completion Date: h h hh Close-Out Documents: ~[bO /. 9V TGV OC4L f~&b l@K. F5/2_kT f(Tf O tTSp l G 4 6 ffl/IEW OF A 1-7 k C E'b n)nIe.Aff % Comments: 7/ L FAILwwJin7csri+)c ai rf*)Q/1 F0/t. LNNST (JQtE A)or EX'cc%Eh Comp,e,ed ey; (ANic=f i Dat.: 't 96 Reviewed By: #4 ! # / Date: 98 b A,,,oved e,. ir8/leC' Date: +//e/h Re_ed ,,; ha%3xw Da,. +/isIn u ' W
4 SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
/ SSC: 68 - Containment Structure Status:(a)( ) Updated: Apnl 9,1996 Unit: 2 Performance Monitorina Period:
Performance Criteria: ILRT: 5.0, .6 La Reliability $ 2 MPFFs per 18 month period. (Funct. Failure specified at penetration comp. admin. limrt) PLPC 4: 0 unplanned " red" SSA during outages RELIABILITY: List all failures (indicate train for nsk sig. SSCs), corrective actions and MPFFs: (attach supporting documents as applicable, e g. CRs, ADM 17.08 Figs, etc.) 10/95 - P SH-18-797 - failed admin. limit (no maint. history) 10/95 - P V-18-1270 - failed admin limit. Valve replaced (last maint. history was 5/92) 10/95 - P-28A - SE-05 plug scored and prtted. Valve repaired. No prior maint. history this penod. 10/95 - P FCV-25-36 wear on seat, new O-nng and seat. Last failed test 10/90. 2/94 - P SE-03-2A - valve intemals inspected Sat. Valve rebuilt. Leak perf. trending poor. Pos. MPFF 2/94 P-4BB - V-27101 - valve replaced. (no maint. history this period) 1/6/95 - STAR # 2-950042 documents leaking feedthrough module problem with Elect. Pen Module D-6 Penetration modules C 1, C-5, C-8, D-3, D-6 also are problems from leak test results. Root cause revealed chlonne induced stress corrosion cracking occunng at feedthrough sealing surface. Cause is indeterminate and may be MPFF. Due to the number of electrical penetrations affected, the Unit 2 Electrical Penetrations are a candidate for (a)(1) goal setting and monitonng, l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause No PLPC 4 axceedance. Trends: All containment penetrations are performance trended by the OST group. Components showing l previous failures were evaluated for cause as per above. l Recent applicable industry information: Diablo Canyon also tracks as performance entena for containment penetrations, percent of component type failures. This methodology is currently under review for use at St. Lucie. l l
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SW: 68 - Containment Structure Statua:(s)( ) Updated: Apnl9,1996 , Unh:1 Performance Monitorina Period-Forformance Crtteria: ILRT: 10.6 La Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs per 18 month period. (Funct Failure specified at penetration comp. admin. limit) PLPC 4: 0 unplanned " red" SSA dunng outages RELIABILIT;Y List all failures (indicate train for risk sig. SSCs), corrective actions and MPFFs: (attach supporting documents as applicable, e g. CRs, ADM 17.08 Figs, etc.) 11/94 - P V-18195 - failed admin. limit (found worn and patted). Valve replaced. No maint. since 12/91. 11/94 - P V 14415 - failed admin limit and left in failed condition. No prev. maint. this penod. 11/94 P-52A - FCV-26 failed admin limit and left in failed conddion. No prev. maint this period. , i l , l I l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE: l Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC,was cause No PLPC 4 exceedance. t i Trends: All containment penetrations are performance trended by the OST group. Components showing previous failures were evaluated for cause as per above. Recent applicable Industry information:
- Diablo Canyon also tracks as performance critena for containment penetrations, percent of component type failures. This methodology is currently under review for use at St. Lucie.
I KPRC04AA Nuctecr Plant Astiability Data System - Failure Orief Report Run DItas 02/23/% I
, .- By: Unit 10 v:Lue, Utility Congonent ID, Faltura Discovery DIts Job Number 7323 i
, Uni t_ ; Coup,, _ Utility Camponent Id _ _ Dates Narratives ' i l lF $2 PENETR PERSONNEL / HATCH 00: 01/04/93 Desc: DURING A PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE INSPECTION OF THE REACTOR SUILDING i *
- ID: 05/13/93 ( PERSONNEL / 4ATCM ) IT WAS FOUND THAT THE INNER DOOR WOULD NOT CLOSE Appl AFTER IT WAS CYCLED ONCE . ALTNOUGH THE UNIT WAS OFF LINE , THE INNER Desc: 000R MAY NOT NAVE CLOSED IF CALLED UPON BEFCRE ADJUSTMENTS WERE MADE .
Cause: INSPECTION OF THE DOOR REVEALED A SENSOR BRACKET INTERFERING WITH Func: THE 000R FRAfE . If IS SUSPECTED THAT Loose SWING ARM RSS WRE THE Dese: CAUSE OF AN INNER 000R MISALIGIBGENT . IT WAS UNKNOWN NOW THE INNER 000R DECAfE MISALIGNED . I:fra C310 - Chicago Bridge & tron to Action: THE SWING ARM amarr8T WAS MOVED . THE SWING RCD ARMS WRE Mod Nun: 73 7302 ADJUSTIENT As A PLANT WORK ORDER WAS WRITTEN TO CORRECT AN QUT OF Mod id: PLtmu 000R DURING THE NEXT OUTAGE . PWO893001450 / HD0 l System: SAD Conteirinent Penetration-CE P*' Sys: CPS l l l FPLSLS2 PENETR PERSONNEL / MATCH 50: 04/14/93 Dese: DURING A SURVEILLANCE TEST OF THE REACTOR" BUILDING PERSONNEL DOOR j i ID: 05/24/93 IT WAS FOUND THAT THE OUTER 000R HAND WHEEL SPUN FREELY . THIS LOST l Appt: THE A81LITY TO ACCESS THE CONTAlWMENT WITH NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . Ds:c: CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY WAS NOT AFFECTED . Cause: THE OUTER 000R MAND WHEEL PULLED OUT OF THE RING FEEDER ASSEMBLY
- Funct . THE CAUSE WAS NOT KNOWN .
02sc Action: THE MANDWHEEL RING FEEDER INNER RACE BEARING WAS REPLACED . THE ASSEMBLY WAS CLEANED AND TESTED SATISFACTORlLY . PW0893011224 / HD0 Mfr: C310 Chicago Beit 4 Iron Co , 1 , Mod Nun: 73 7302
%dId: l i
system: SAD -Contairunent Penetration-CE 1 l Utt Sys: CPS l l l l l l l l i
1.0 , INTRODUCTION Implementation of the NRC Maintenance Rule, in accordance with NUMARC 93-01,
" Industry G puoline for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants" requires events having an impact on systems within scope be evaluated to determine if they are Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures (MPFFs). The following methodology provides guidance to be used when making MPFF decisions.
Figure 1 is provided to assist in MPFF determinations. The intent is that the MPFF decision making process use the basic causes found on Figure 1 to determine is a Functional Failure is maintenance preventable. Figure 1 was developed to be consistent with the Event Casual Factor Categories found in Appendix A of INPO Good Practice OE-907, " Root Cause Analysis." 2.0 MPFF Determination Guidelines FUNCTIONAL FAILURES A MPFF is an unintended event or condition sucn that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not capable of performing its intended function. I Intended function is defined as ..the function (s) performed by the SSC,as listed in the MR, that required itt inclusion within the scope of the rule. For SSC's that have Plant Level , Performance Cnteria such as SCRAMS, the intended func6cn is to not cause a SCRAM. Failure that results in un event covered under a Plant Level, such as Unplanned Safety l l System Actuation, would be a functional failura. Loss of function can be either direct, i.e., tha SSC that performs the function fails to perform its intended function or indirect, i.e., the SSC fails to perform its intended function as a result of another SSC (safety related or non-safety related). If a functional failure recurs during post maintenance testing but before retuming the SSC's to service, it could be indicative of unacceptable corrective actions but is not considered another functional failure. Intended function is further defined as a demand function or run function. A conscious decision to make a function unavailable is not normally a functional failure. Failure to meet a Technical Specification is not automatically a loss of function. An evaluation of the event may find that system design criterion was met even though the TS acceptance ! cnteria was not. 1 i l
. _ _ . _. . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ .___.m j -
I i l Failure during a test must be evaluated to determine if the same would have occurred during a l
; true demand or in absence of the test conditions. If so, the failure is a functional failure. '
! Failure of a redundant component is considered a functional failure if the component is 1 of 2, I i or requires 2 of 3 coinadence. i ) MAINTENANCE PREVENTABLE I l I I A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not l capable of performing its intended function and should have been orevented by the j oerformance of maintenance actions by the utility. J j The cause of the failure is attnbuted to a maintenance-related activity. ) Maintenance includes not only those activities traditionally associated with identifying and correcting actual or potentially degraded conditions, i.e., repair, surveillance, diagnostic j examinations, and preventive measures, but extends to all supporting functions for the conduct l of these activities. l Examples of Maintenance Preventable: ll l -Implementation of incorrect maintenance procedures. I
-incorrect implementation of correct maintenance procedures. l
.; -Incorrect implementation of maintenance performed without procedures considered within the l I
! skill of the craft.
l -Failures as previously documented by Operating Experience that could have been precluded , ! by an appropriate and timeiy maintenance activity. I -Failure to perform maintenance activities that are normal and appropriate to the equipment ]' function and importance. 1 i Examples that are not Maintenance Preventable: i -Initial failures due to OEM design and manufacturing including initial electronic piece part early ) failures.
-initial failure s due to design inadequacies in selecting or applying commercial or "off the shelf"
) , designed equipment. ! -Initial failures due to inherent material defects. ! -Operational errors and extemal or initiating events.
-intentional run to failure. .
I Corrective maintenance based on the Pass / Fail of a surveillance test is not considerch J MPFF unless the equipment could not have performed its function, e.g., check vr.hro 4ak rate l i i 1
test. Although the component has exceeded a defined condition, maintenance is only performed once that condition is exceeded. i Components being out of specsfication (e.g. breaker trip times) is not considered a MPFF l unless the equipment could not have performed its funcbon l Packing leakage is not a MPFF unless the equipment could not perform its function. Minor leaks will be considered MPFF's if the valve function is to prevent radiological releases. 1 Functional failure of a component that can be demonstrated to be a first time event (plant and ( industry) and the plant had no reasonable way of expecting an occurrence (vendor manual or l related experience), will not be tallied as an MPFF against a Performance Criterion. However, ; it will be tallied as part of the repeat MPFF count. , l I Refer to Figure 1, MPFF Program Areas and Basic Causes, for the determination of Maintenance Preventable based on functional failure basic cause. I l
i k I:r i. ;Il: :l L Fi , y: ; ; :i i : [!; r' .;. [' . i i
,J
., M ,
. p a
a s
.r g
p , , _
- M_am.p e.e_
C a
, c, N- _- o
-~ - .
.a a g -
. a. r l w ,a .e. ~
a . , e -
- m. e
- s. e ,.,W S . ..
'W
- ' . = B -
* ' -_ - .. == inn ,
,m. _
=
m __=- o. m _ g ie 7 se;n ,e a
~
e v t d .
-- oe .
Nt a
.. e c ee r
l p; . u ~ aR ace
~
.- t
^ .
,o
. .. o
~ .
h n t m
- o. 8 n
_ a e o..m
.r
.P
_r_r,e.=
.r e
- sn ee t
A
- un st
_ m - a r aia g S E . g' _ . CM o r P mt _ a l . S c
-- _p s - .
a U -
- e. , e' A .-
o""
. , _ a C . -
n o
=
=-
=
C I S A "
' un ae _w= m., M M
=-
=
B - D " Ml i 1 N _ . EA _ - v
=e * -
=com
* =a p _
RS u UA _ ._ e=,
.j p .
p - m= _
-=
r T _ ,,c,,r_ s -
^
ce e . _ GE .m- - -- s
. aM *'**=& d I R .
.L nu FA . - . e. _ . .
* =
aa ) M e. - _ -^- >
,*Lr i nC A
R t r _ ~ t ed ne t he G _
._ iaa l p
O ._ ;
. Mle m e 1 R R s a .
_ n ,s ., S P _ t o , ( - F $ m 1 s m e_e_.M_m *
. om F
s _ P r * . a.m*7mc_r.
. aw w m M _
_ 1r.. , . _ . - . r; _ m." m_ _ w - _ _g _ g o
%p
$ u -
_ a _ o i - - _ _. ~ _-g 1 _ m ~ s, r_ e .
.n was .
mi p,c 2 ; o s
- a 6
_ A _ _ .. h M.m,%_m, N e . 8
.=ep
_nt %m,b,. h .
. P
. ., . . d
, *e .m
, . "= ==- .
a- p o.
$ . . - ^ i M
_ 1 _- a e m - m , _ 1 e7 . _ .a a-
.m , - ,, * = ke
_ as
*= = -
na s ,
,F . w.cP "
=
m_ er c^, , l
3 l FIGufE TtJ d (EXA wl PL E - . i !, SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR #c- . \ f l ! SSC: 9b - Auxiliary Feedwater Status:(a)(2) Updated: 14 March,1996
~
Perform ~ance Monitorina Period: Previous 12 months for OOS hrs & LERs,36 months for all others. j 1 Performance Criteria: ) Unavailability: U1& U2 <88 hrs /yr per A&B train,168 hrs /yr per C train (OOS hrs - 12 month period) l ! Reliability: 51 Repetative MPFFs, and 5 2 unrelated MPFFs per train,36 month period. i PLPC 3: ' si unplanned and LER reportable ESF actuations last 12 months. (Exludes AFAS) ; i UNAVAILABILITY: l i 1 1 I l i
- W ** .. 2:. Qm. t.. t-
~ ,. .. .-. ,c..
9 ...
.w. , - ;
REAllABILIW: List all train failures, corrective actions and MPFFs (attach ADM 17.08 Fipt, STARS, etc.) 2C AFW train 2/27/93 - SE-09-4 grounded by water intrusion, valve may not have stroked dunng valid demand. 3/13/96 - SE-09-4 failure to open during surveillance testing. Cause due to intermittent keyswitch fault. (Root , Cause Report SCE 96-10) l 11/6/95 - MV-09 Broken torque switch discovered during testing. Possible MPFF. ; 9/20/95 - MV-08-3 tnp hook and latching lever indicated excessive wear causing a trip of the mech over speed trip mechanism. Loss of 1 of 3 trains AFW. Cause appears to be normal wear. Possible MPFF l 9/15/95 - CKT BKR 60903 for MV-08-13 shorted due to water intrusion causing loss of 1 of 3 trains of AFW. I Switch was replaced, new gasket installed on junction door. Possible MPFF. l 2A AFW train 1 l 3/1/94 - 2A AFW motor breaker would not close due to broken cottor pin. Possible MPFF PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE CRITERIA: , O Unplanned LER reportable ESF actuations for the past 3 years l Trends: 2B AFW-(35.8 hrs unavail. Aug 95) caused Q3 95 spike. 2C AFW-(51.5 hrs unavail. Sep 95 due to corrective maintenance) reason for Q3 95 spike. 4 functional failures (not all maintenance preventable) on C AFW train in past 3 years. Recent aoolicable Industrv information: INPO SER 4-95, " Terry Turbine Govemor (Woodward) Valve Stem Binding"
. . - . . - . __ . . . . _ _ _ . _ . . . . _ _ . . - . . . . . ~ . ,-- - - . - . ._ -
'I SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: Statu :(c)( ) Updated: {
r- l Performance Monitorina Peri9d; Performance criteria: Unavailability: Reliability: PLPC UNAVAILABILITY-1 1 REllABILITY-1 l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Trends: l i Recent applicable industry Information:
REVIDRAET 2 PROCEDU44%EMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAGE: THE MAINTENANCE RULE 30 of 36 ' ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE i
"" d6N"If.2)'8 ST. LUCIE PLANT
, FIGURE 4 (Page 1 of 2)
I Goal Setting and Monitoring I Unit: 1 2 Date: Risk Significant: 0 Yes o No j SSC: Reason for Goal Setting: ) Performance Criteria Not Met Which criteria were not met? , I Description of Events: l Repetitive MPFF (attach Figure 3 for each failure) Explain how failures are repetitive. l Were previous corrective actions inadequate? I References (attach): Does this SSC require (a)(1) status? Oyes o No System Owner Yes - signature of Expert Panel Member Maintenance Rule Coordinator No - signature and reason why not Expert Panel Chairman
t REVIDRAET 2 PRoCEDUMMRLEMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAGE:
. THE MAINTENANCE RULE 31 of 36 l ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE l "" d b W . lib ST. LUCIE PLANT
- FIGURE 4 (Page 2 of 2)
Goal Setting and Monitoring (continued) Root Cause Analysis: Assigned to: l Corrective Actions and Responsibilities: Assigned to: - 1. 2. I 3. i
- 4. l Goal Setting and Monitoring: For each corrective action, there should be a goal I to be attained that shows the action was correct, monitoring for a follow-up period to verify success, and a discussion to show how PSA and industrywide l operating experience were used in the process.
Goal Monitoring method & frequency Date PSA/ Industry Exp
- 1. 1.
- 2. 2.
- 3. 3.
- 4. 4.
i Prepared by: System Owner Date Review and Concurrence: Maintenance Rule Coordinator Date Review and Approved: Expert Panel Chairman Date 1
o . j MMAl Form Version: 0 Corrective Action Fo rm 9 PMAI Site:ESL Source Number: PM96-03-543 Document: WALCHESKI PMAI REOOriginator:SCE Due Date: 3/29/96 Assigned Deptartment: [G ICMUBER. ORDWAY 2 Im - x A Name Unit Outage Mode SNO NCR OWA
Description:
MAIKI. RULE WAS PERFORMED TO ID POTENTIAL FUNCTIONAL FAILURES. NPRDS/ PASSPORT DATA REQUIRES FURTHER EVAL: REVIEW AND 10 MAINT. PREVENTABLE FUNCTIONAL FAILURES CASES; LIST OCCURENCES ON, OR ATTACH TO SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR. EXJGUIDANCE ATTACHED. QSPOS:lO ANY REPEAT MPFF'S (SAME CAUSE) OCCUR. REVIEW RESULTS WITH SSC PERFORMANCE CRITERIA. IF ANY PC IS EXCEEDED COMPLETE FIG 4. 7cceptance section l Status / Comments: n I understand and accept responsibility of the above listed action and due date DeparMnt Manager Sig'n5ture 6 l Due Date Extension / Transfer Responsibikty Requests l , Appvd By Extend To Date Request Dy /Date supervisor /Date Onginator/Date Manager /Date txtena io vate nequest Dy Ipate supervisor /vate vnginator/vate manager /vate Reasons: Appvd By M tH Resp.To Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Manager /Date Recipient /Date Reasons: [ Completion ~Section j Completion Date: Close-Out Documentv Comments: 12. F F E f TO % /9EtttIfSd(2 p t> A LsWho WO - (2-D(2.cdA.J, -h Completed By: 4 /
- Id Date: 2E I Revewed By;
- / -((3dd Date: I$
Approved By: b M / / Date: P.-.d ., mx / Ten-U
. .t.
a,s.
'I, h
- , ~ - . - . --., .
. . _ . . . - - . . ~- -
i 02/04/96 PASSPORT REPORTING SYSTEM Pcg3: 15 PASS 3300 St. Lucio Plcnt R: port Writor 15.17.02 l ' Comp Tag # : ICC CNTL CAB SB Assoc: T16 ASME XI: N Dese: ICC CONTROL CABINET SB INCORE MONITOR DETECTOR Loc Dese: RCS/71
'cquest:
. Hold: Crew: FG Shift: 1 Dept INST Plan Id RRHoQPH T & B: Y Unit Cond: 3 PCM: NA Def Tag: Def Tag Locs NPRDS:
Start: 12/28/95 / 07:00 End: 12/30/95 / 16:00 Age: 58 Wark Desc NOTE-THIS SCOPE CHANGE IS TO ADD THESE CET'S TO THIS NPWO: T-13,T-18,C-4,C-9.E-16,E-18 Trouble Found / Work Performed: REVIEWED OPS PERMISSION TO START SCOPE CHANGE. PERFORMED VOLTAGE CHECKS ON THE FOLLOWING CET'S PER FIELD SUPERVISOR'S INSTRUCTIONS. CET # CN RX HEAD AT DISCONNECT PANEL E-18 2.18 MV E-16 2.19 MV C.4 2.24 MV C.9 400-600 MV WON: 95035978 01 Units 02 Pri Al Status: 85 i WRN: 95021808 Orig. Dept: PWON: 6035 Sys: 70 l Orig Date: 12/27/95 Asgn To: RB WKTP: 5 Comp Tag # ICC CNTL CAB SB Assoc ASME XI: N q Dese: INADEQUATE CORE CLG CONTROL CABINET SB g g/ Loc Desc: RAB/62/S-RA3/W-RAJ R quest: DISPLAY INDICATES ALI,NJICS FAILID Hold Crews RB Shift: 1 Depts INST Plan Id: WAP00QF T & B: Y Unit Cond 8 PCM: NA Dsf Tag: Def Tag Locs NPRDS: N Start: 12/27/95 / 11:00 End 12/28/95 / 15:00 Age: 59 Work Desc:
- 1. VERIFY THAT YOU ARE WORKING ON THE CORRECT UNIT -----------------
S AND. /. OR.
.. ...C.. OMP. ONE.NT. .( S ) :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .... . .. .. . . . . . . . . .I G NA. T. URE. / D. AT. E. .
- 2. INVESTIGATE REPORTED DEFECT WITH CSPDS AND ASSOC HJTCS USE AP 0010124, LIFTED LEADS, AND /OR AP 0010142, SENSITIVE SYSTEMS Trouble Found / Work Performed:
OBTAINED OPS PERMISSION. PERFOR!iED FRONT PANEL TEST #0 AND IT RESULTED IN AN E16 MESSAGE. 12-27-95 S.G. VERHOEVEN kNVESTIGATED PROBLEM WITH HJTC'S. CHECKED READINGS ON "B" CHANNEL UNCONTROLLED COPY FOR REFERENCE ONLY VERIFY WITH CONTROLLED COPY PRIOR TO USE i i I i e
_- - .- . - _ ~ . ._ 02/24/96 PASSPORT REPORTING SYSTEM Pag 2: 22 PASS 3300 St. Lucio Plcnt R: port Writer 13.17.02 WO#: 93028065 01 Unit: 02 Pri: Al Status: 85 WRN: 93017589 Orig. Dept: OPS PWO#: 2099 Sys: 70 Orig Date: 10/14/93 Asgn To: FG WKtP: 5 p Tag #: ICC CNTL CAB SB Assoc: DISPLAY-B ASME XI: N Deses DISPLAY IN RTUB FOR ICC CONTROL CAB SB Loc Desc: RTGB-203 Rrquest REACTOR VESSEL LEVEL FAILING Hold Crew FG Shift: 1 Dept INST Plan Id: MEWOCIT T & B: Y Unit Cond: 8 PCM: N/A Def Tag: C63852 Def Tag Loc: CONTROL ROOM NPRDS: N Start: 10/25/93 / 08:00 Endt 05/06/94-/ -16 r0C Age 863 werk Desc: .
- 1. INVESTIGATE REPORTED DEFECT USING DRAWINGS AND VENDOR TECH MANUALS LISTED IN TEDB. USE AP 0010124, LIFTED LEADS, AND AP 0010142, SENSITIVE SYSTEMS AS REQUIRED WHEN LIFTING LEADS, PULLING FUSES,ETC
- 2. MAKE MINOR REPAIRS, INCLUDING CIRCUIT BOARD REPLACEMENT, USING VENDOR TECH MANUALS AS A REFERENCE.
Trouble Found / Work Performed: RX VESSEL LEVEL AND ALL OTHER PARAMETERS OBSERVED TO BE NORMAL. OPERATOR WHO WITNESSED FAILING LEVEL STATED IT OCCURRED INTERMITTENTLY AT SAME TIME INVERTER TROUBLE ANNUNCIATOR CAME IN. ELECTRICIANS GENERATING THEIR OWN PWO AND ARE GOING TO MONITOR VOLTAGE AND CURRENT ON OUTPUT OF INVERTER. HOLDING THIS PWO OPEN UNTIL DETERMINATION OF INVERTER. 10-15-93 M.J. REED INVERTER REPAIRED BY ELECTRIC SHOP. CHANNEL CHECK OK. WO# 93025024 01 Unit: 02 Pri AA Status 85 WRN 93015732 Orig. Dept: IC PWo#: 1984 Sys: 70 Orig Date: 09/14/93 Asgn To: FG WKTP: 5 Comp TagN: ICC ONTL CAB SB Assoc CABINET ASME XI: N Desc: INADEQUATE CORE CLG CONTROL CABINET SB Loc Dese: RAB/62/S-RA3/W-RAJ // Rrquest s- THERE ARE NO OPERABLE CET'S W B CHANNEL Hold: Crew: FG Shift: 1 C Dept: INST Plan Id SNS0BSC T & B: Y Unit Cond 8 PCM: N/A Def Tag: C63884 Def Tag Loc DEFF LOG BOOK NPRDS: N Start: 09/14/93 / 16:00 End: 09/14/93 / 23:30 Age: 893 Work Desc: ADHERE TO AP 80010124 AND/OR AP #0010142 AS REQUIRED BY OPS WHEN LIFTING LEADS, INSTALLING JUMPERS, PULLING FUSES, MAKING RESTORATIONS. kNVESTIGATEINOPERABILITYOFCOREEXITTHERMOCOUPLES.MAKENECESSARY REPAIRS TO OR REPLACE SYSTEM CONNECTIONS / WIRING / ASSOCIATED COMPONENTS TO RESTORE SYSTEM INTEGRITY. COMPLETE POST-MAINTENANCE TESTS PER APPLICABLE APPENDIX OF QI 11-4 I Trouble Found / Work Performed: 1 REMOVED BOARD DT1748-24-EX / FOUND DIRTY END CONNECTORS / CLEANED END l UNCONTROLLED COPY FOR REFERENCE ONLY VERIFY WITH CONTROLLED COPY PRIOR TO USE l l l l l l l l l l l
J
1.0 INTRODUCTION
implementation of the NRC Maintenance Rule, in accordance with NUMARC 930 f Maintenance at Nuclear Power
" Industry Guideline for Monitoring the Effectiveness o Plants," requires events having an_ impact on systems within scope be The evaluated to determine if they are Maintenance Preventable Functional Failses ]MPFFs).
following methodology provides guidance to be used when making MPFF decisions. Figure 1 is provided to assist in MPFF determinations. The intent is that the MPFF decision making process use the basic causes found on Figure 1 to determine is a Functional Failure is maintenance preventable. Figure 1 was developed to be consistent with the Event Casual Factor Categories found in Appendix A of INPO Good Practice OE-907," Root Cause Analysis." 2.0 MPFF Determination Guidelines FUNCTIONAL FAILURES l A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not capable of peiforming its intended function, Intended function is defined as ..the function (s) performed by the SSC,as listed in the MR, that f required its inclusion within the scope of the rule. For SSC's that have Plant Level Performance Cnteria such as SCRAMS, the intended function is to not cause a SCRAM. Failure that results in an event covered under a Plant Level, such as Unplanned Safety System Actuation, would be a functional failure. Loss of function can be either direct, i.e., the SSC that performs the function fails to perform its intended function or indirect, i.e., the SSC fails to perform its intended function as a result of another SSC (safety related or noresafety related). If a functional failure recurs during post maintenance testing but before retuming the SSC's to service, it could be indicative of unacceptable corrective actions but is not considered another functional failure. Intended function is further defined as a demand function or run function. A conscious decision to make a function unavailable is not normally a functional failure. Failure to meet a Technical S$f=4 von is not automatically a loss of function. An evaluation of the event may find that system design criterion was met even though the TS acceptance ! cnteria was not. . 6
~ - , . . _ .
. - . - . - . , _ . - - . _ - . . - _ - - - ~ . - - - - -
Failure during a test must be evaluated to dotarmene if the same would have occurred dunng a true demand or in absence of the test condibons. If so, the failure is a functional failure. Failure of a redundant component is considered a funcbonal failure if the component is 1 of 2, or requires 2 of 3 coenodence. MAINTENANCE PREVENTABLE A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not capable of performing its intended funcbon and should have been orevented by the performance of maintenance actions by the utility, The cause of the failure is attributed to a maintenance-related actmty. Maintenance includes not only those activities traditionally associated with identifying and correcting actual or potentially degraded conditions,' i.e., repair, surveillance, diagnostic examinations, and preventive measures, but extends to all supporting funcbons for the conduct of these activities. Examples of Maintenance Preventable:
-Implementation of incorrect maintenance procedures.
-Incorrect implementation of correct maintenance procedures.
-Incorrect implementation of maintenance performed without procedures considered within the skill of the craft.
-Failures as previously documented by Operating Experience that could have been precluded by an appropnate and timely maintenance actmty.
-Failure to perform maintenance activities that are normal and appropriate to the equipment function and importance.
Examples that are not Maintenance Preventable:
-Initial failures due to OEM design and manufactunng including initial electronic piece part eariy failures.
-Initial failures due to design inadequacies in selecting or applying commercial or "off the shelf' designed equipment.
-Initial failures due to inherent material defects.
-Operational errors and extemal or initiating events.
-Intentional run to failure.
Corrective maintenance based on the Pass / Fail of a surveillance test is not considered a MPFF unless the equipment could not have performed its funcbon, e.g., check valve leak rate i i I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Implementation of the NRC Maintenancs Rule, in accordance with NUMARC 9301,
" Industry Guideline for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power l Plants," requires events having an impact on systems within scope be evaluated to determine if they are Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures (MPFFs). The following irdedology provides guidance to be used when making MPFF decisions.
Figure 1 is provided to assist in MPFF determinations. The intent is that the MPFF decision making process use the basic causes found on Figure 1 to determine is a Functional Failure is maintenance preventable. Figure 1 was developed to be consistent with the Event Casual Factor Categories found in Appendix A of INPO Good Practice OE-907," Root Cause Analysis." 2.0 MPFF Deterrnination Guidelines FUNCTIONAL FAILURES A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not capable of performing its intended funcbon Intended function is defined as ..the function (s) performed by the SSC,as listed in the MR, that required its inclusion within the scope of the rule. For SSC's that have Plant Level Performance Cntena such as SCRAMS, the intended function is to not cause a SCRAM. Failure that results in an event covered under a Plant Level, such as Unplanned Safety System Actuation, would be a functional failure. Loss of function can be either direct, i.e., the SSC that perfonns the function fails to perform its intended function or indirect, i.e., the SSC fails to perform ris intended function as a result of another SSC (safety related or non safety related). If a functional failure recurs during post maintenance testing but before retuming the SSC's to service, it could be indicative of unacceptable corrective actions but is not considered another functional failure. Intended function is further defined as a demand function or run function. A conscious decision to make a function unav::ilable is not normally a functional failure. Failure to meet a Technical Specification is not automatically a loss of function. An evaluation of the event may find that system design criterion was met eyes though the TS acceptance enteria was not. .
l i Failure dunng a test must be evaluated to determine if the same would have occurred dunng a true demand or in absence of the test conditions. If so, the failure is a functional failure. Failure of a redundant component is considered a funchonal failure if the component is 1 of 2, or requires 2 of 3 comodence. MAINTENANCE PREVENTABLE A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not capable of performing its intended function and should have been orevented by the i performance of maintenance actions by the utility, ; The cause of the failure is attributed to a maintenance related actmty. Maintenance includes not only those activities traditionally associated with identifying and correctirig actual or potentially degraded conditions, i.e., repair, surveillance, diagnostic examinations, and preventive measures, but extends to all supporting functions for the conduct of these activities. Examples of Maintenance Preventable-
-Implementation of incorrect maintenance procedures.
-Incorrect implementation of correct maintenance procedures.
-Incorrect implementation of maintenance performed without procedures considered within the skill of the craft.
-Failures as previously documented by Operating Experience that could have been precluded by an appropnate and timely maintenance actmty.
-Failure to perform maintenance activities that are normal and appropriate to the equipment function and importance.
Examoles that are not Maintenance Preventable:
-Initial failures due to OEM design and manufactunng including initial electronic piece part early l
failures.
-Initial failures due to design inadequacies in selecting or applying commercial or "off the shelf" designed equipment.
-Initial failures due to inherent material defects.
-Operational errors and extemal or initiating events.
-Intentional run to failure.
Correchve maintenance based on the Pass / Fail of a surveillance test is not considered a MPFF unless the equipment could not have performed its funcbon, e.g., check vatve leak rate
t l l l I test. Although the component has exceeded a defined condition, maintenance is only I performed once that condition is exceeded.' Components being out of specification (e.g. breaker trip t#mes) is not considered a MPFF unless the equipment could not have performed its funcbon Packing leakage is not a MPFF unless the equipment could not perform its function. Minor leaks will be considered MPFF's if the valve funcbon is to prevent radiological releases. Functional failure of a component that can be demonstrated to be a first time event (plant and industry) and the plant had no reasonable way of expecting an occurrence (vendor manual or related experience), will not be tallied as an MPFF against a Performance Criterion. However, it will be tallied as part of the repeat MPFF count. Refer to Figure 1 MPFF Program Areas and Basic Causes, for the determination of Maintenance Preventable based on functional failure basic cause. l 1 l 1 l l
yasa r., .__, __2 m-a o a_..ae .w 6 2 -gA -*m..+-= a *.m ., _m 2_ m%=-.m4*4,aa .-m_ **_AAAaJA-A..J-- -.A*_4.3hme_ J p _~--q-4.4 d.A6_ 4. A. J.__-.m4 L g a a 1 e l 12 I ' i. I i ti i l' t M 1,t 'if l 5 k i,h . !. 13 I g.r : , g e.j
.a ~ i
' &y ! f$ g v ill : 4 J ,c ki,,i 3
-li l =
i e.l g
'V g :0s l
i I g,g ! > 8 a' _ Q pni , 6 I I t al ' lit
' ^ ^ ^ -
is o.h . g 1 t o & t_i . EI ! u
- , ,,?
t! sg l,] ' e i III1;g y,' i]Ei i : co o@ E o, i ._...,.'e.. , [, 1_ I _ la g 3 8l ' .! , l
. fie 1
,I, E
u. j r- I, i ,g , I: lg, ~ 4
!ii iwj i Mg ,J W i J}
? l, , .
4 I a l
.i.,
9 , k i r ]l 1[ L 4 e ;t ;i a ! t
)I Il g. ) j
!- 'E I J l
!] 1. J! iLt3 r' d H I,-t.
.2 1 l'i I l{
~ t .
t j tj
. Ll i i . ,i ] aj
, , j,l .
- p. j {ijl .Igl ,
1
. FZGun / wu LL- M 171 r t- t i
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR ef-- - j SSC: 9b - Auxiliary Feedwater Status:(a)(2) Updated: 14 March 1996 i
! Performance Monitorina Period: Previous 12 months for OOS hrs & LERs,36 months for all others.
j i Performance Criteria l Unavailability: U18 (" <88 hrs /yr per A&B train,168 hrs /yr per C train (OOS hrs - 12 month period) j Reliability: 51 Rc,W3tue MPFFs, and 5 2 unrelated MPFFs per train,36 month period. j PLPC 3: 51 unplanned and LER reportable ESF actuations last 12 months. (Exludes AFAS) j UNAVAILABILITY: p , espan %. .s . ., A ,-g .....
.'-.-W',..s v . emaar W w @ W.ge3 W yy.,em>>er.-
- s. .;4 ' .- . *.. - .. .
- g ;il ),', .q - ), , ;) g , g,: 1.-fr.i++,', T .1'? -- .
-. 4
~&&.,. f, wm ., ~T.. .
. . . , ,, ., ,, . _ . . 3,4 ;r , y . w , f gj. ,T . p_. 3 ;
j! ... f__....... .,......--......~,s.._..,,m 2 i m l .
, .EEllEEMargum -
um.
- l . .
] i REAllABILITY: List all train failures, correctue actions and MPFFs (attach ADM 17.08 Figs, STARS, etc.) 2C AFWtrain 2/27/93 - SE-09-4 grounded by water intrusion, valve may not have stroked dunng valid demand. i 3/13/96 - SE-09 4 failure to open during surveillance testing. Cause due to intermittent keyswitch fault. (Root i Cause Report SCE 96-10) d 11/6/95 - MV-09 Broken torque switch discovered during testing. Possible MPFF. I 9/20/95 - MV-08-3 tnp hook and latching lever indicated excessrve wear causing a inp of the mech over speed j inp mechanism. Loss of 1 of 3 trains AFW. Cause appears to be normal wear. Possible MPFF
- 9/15/95 - CKT BKR 60903 for MV-08-13 shorted due to water intrusion causing loss of 1 of 3 trains of AFW.
l Switch was replaced, new gasket installed on junction door. Possible MPFF. 1 2A AFW train j 3/1/94 - 2A AFW motor breaker would not close due to broken cottor pin. Possible MPFF i PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE CRITERIA: 1 ! O Unplanned LER reportable ESF actuations for the past 3 years Trends: 1 28 AFW-(35.8 hrs unavail. Aug 95) caused Q3 95 spike. l 2C AFW-(51.5 hrs unavail. Sep 95 due to correctue maintenance) reason for Q3 95 spike. 4 functional failures (not all maintenance preventable) on C AFW train in past 3 years.
- l. .
Recent aoolicable Industry Information: 4 1
; INPO SER 4-95, " Terry Turbine Govemor (Woodward) Vatve Stem Binding
- 1 j
I j
. . - . . - - .. . _ _..._,. . _ . . - _ . - . . _ ~ . . . _ . . - . - - . . _ - - . - _ -
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR CsC: status:(a)( ) Updated: (day)(Month),1996 s Performance Monitorine Period: Previous 12 months OOS hrs Performance Criteria: PLPC : (lest specific plant level performance crrtena, PLPC 1,2a,2b, 3,4, 5) I i PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause 4 FAILURES. List all failures, corrective actions and MPFFs: (attach supporting documents as apphcable, e g CRs, ADM 17.08 Figs, etc.) Trends: Recent soolicable industry Information: hst as apphcable e e
< neviD64AET 2 rnoCEDUMMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAGE:
THE MAINTENANCE RULE 30 of 36 - I ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
" E@.7)B ST. LUCIE PLANT FIGURE 4 (Page 1 of 2)
Goal Setting and Monitoring Unit: 1 2 Date: Risk Significant: 0 Yes o No SSC: Reason for Goal Setting: Performance Criteria Not Met Which criteria were not met? Description of Events: Repetitive MPFF (attach Figure 3 for each failure) Explain how failures are repetitive. Were previous corrective actions inadequate? References (attach): l Does this SSC require (a)(1) status? Oyes o No System Owner Yes - signature of Expert Panel Member Maintenance Rule Coordinator No - signature and reason why not Expert Panel Chairman l
, neviDRAET 2 enoccov44RtEMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAGe: ) l THE MAINTENANCE RULE 31 of 36 l ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ! ""d6Mf.b8 ST. LUCIE PLANT i FIGURE 4 (Page 2 of 2) Goal Setting and Monitoring (continued) Root Cause Analysis: Assigned to: Corrective Actions and Responsibilities: Assigried to: 1. 2. 3. e 4. Goal Setting and Monitoring: For each corrective action, there should be a goal to be attained that shows the action was correct, monitoring for a follow-up period to verify success, and a discussion to show how PSA and industrywide operating experience were used in the process. Goal Monitoring method & frequency Date PSA/ industry Exp
- 1. 1.
- 2. 2.
- 3. 3.
- 4. 4.
Prepared by: System Owner Date I Review and Concurrence: Maintenance Rule Coordinator Date ( j Review and Approved: Expert Panel Chairman Date
. l N,64nn Version: 0 , Corrective Action Form PMAl Site:PSL Source Number: f5&R6-03-545 Document. WALCHESKI PMA! RE70riginator:$CE Due Date: 3/29/96
! Assigned l l ME- TM [Q IC/SHERMAN. NEWHOUSE Q t;" T.;.a Name Unit Outage Mode SNONCR OWA
~ ~~ ~
Description:
MAINT. RULE WAS PERFORMED TO 10 POTENTIAL FUNCTIONAL FAILURsS. NPRDS/ PASSPORT DATA REQUIRES FURTHER EVAL; REVIEW AND 10 MAlKr. PREVENTABLE FUNCTIONAL FAILURES CASES: UST OCCURENCES ON, OR ATTACH TO SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR. EXJGUIDANCE j ATTACHED. ESFAS:10 ANY REPEAT MPFF'S (GAME CAUSE) OCCUR. REVIEW RESULTS WITH SSC P2RFORMANCE CRITERIA. IF ANY PC IS EXCEEDED COMPLETE FIG 4. l Acceptance Section l Status / Comments: e i understand and accept responsibility of the above listed action and due date Departinent Manager Signature l Due Date Extensiona ransfer Responsibility Requests l . Extend To Date Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Onginator/Date Manager /Date exteno io uste Moquest oy Ivate supervisor /vate vnginator/vate manager /vate Reasons: Appvd By Xt LK Resp. To Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Manager /Date Recipient /Date Reasons: [ Completion. Section l
#/ /
Completion Date: Close-Out Documents: A e Comments:Q{$ U 2 65MS h e3 Ac h haw C- NUS Y k te 44 v d{h *
$f b (wb!hle v .
I Completed By: - / M/F 4M Date: U b Revewed By: ( Y /
/ U !N $4/ C Date: # d l Approved By: / .. Jate:
j Reviewed By: / Date: 3
O Nuclear Plant Reliability 01t3 System
. Gener;l Report or: Terry K. Mitter Report Id NPRG00AA ,
*tcrida Power & Light t,wmy Job Musber: 7366 Run Date: 02/24/ %
Am Times 08:36 ntroduction: h) cttached report was generated by your query of the NPRos data base. . summary of your query is listed below. MRY: fou satected the following search condition (s): Fird Falture Olscovery Dates that are af ter 01/01/93 S:lected System is g Jr4lgtfoRE S2tected Unit 10 is $1. LUCIE D th:re were 45 fecords meeting the search condition (s). 31$ PLAY AND 50Rif fou s2 Letted to run generet report 4 Component Falture Arlef Report Y os '
- hose to sort the report by:
Sort Sequence Fleld Name 1 Unit 10 value 2 Utility Ccaponent 10 3 Failure Discovery Datedf gothic 9 type (letter gothic 09 medlun) codepage tid 0 base ] j of gothic 9 l
NPAG04AA Nuclear Plant R3llebility Ditt System F:llura Brief Report Run Det: 02/24/96 By: Unit 10 - value, Utility Component 10, Failure Discovery Det3 Job Ihaber: 7366 l , Unit _ _ Coup _ _ Utility Component Id_,, _ Dates Narratives Pt J RELAY APC404 C Dos 07/05/94 Dese: UNIT 2 WAS ON LINE AT FULL POWER . WHILE PERFORMING THE AUXILI ARY ID: 04/20/95 FEEDWATER ACTUATION SYSTEM ( AFAS ) MONTMLY FUNCTIONAL TEST Appl: SURVE!LLAnCE PROCEDURE , IT WAS DISCOVERED THAM ( INITIATION D:se: TIMER RELAT f.ARD FOR THE CNANNEL 'C' of AFAS ) M.:W g ec , WAS
"*" ~ NF( PREMAT12E Ale DELATED l
funct ESAFPULG NOT OPERATION REPEATABLE
) . TNIS SOL W"Yk AI,$0TN,1,T,5 TRIP TN LOSS OP 10F % ,POIN l Deses ESFAS auxillery/ emergency feedwater actuation AND ITS RESET POINT . t gg. TMERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUBLESNODTING CONFIRpED Mfra E146 - Electro Mechanics Inc THAL SOLID STATE RELAY , APC404 C , WAS UNREPE L .
Mod um: 41213 Cause: TME CAUSE OF RELAY FAILURE I M Bt/r 90 Bete (YYW Mod Id: 'EUS'ReTMThNM'T14 . Action: A NEW RELAY WAS INSTALLED . THE AFAS AND RELAY APC404-C WERE System: ISE Engineered safety Features Actuation-CE TESTED AND RETURNED To NORMAL . ( Wo#94016759 ) TEN O tys: AFAS TLSLS2 181SSW BA106$1AS DD: 07/13/94 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER AND DURING THE ID: 08/25/94 PERFORRANCE OF THE MONTNLY FUNCTIONAL SURVE!LLANCE PROCEDURE ON TNE Appl: ESFAS ( ENGlWEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM ) IT WAS DMc: DISCOVERED M,84106 BIAS 4 BISTA8LE ACTUATION MODULE 106 , ESFAS PRESSUR12ER PRESSURE CHANNEL ) WOULD TRIP WITM THE PROPER INPUT $1GNAL Func: BUT trak 311DT' RESET WNEst TNE TRIP SIGIIAL WS REstWED . TEIS DEEBNSED 1 Ostc: :54F'4 CSABBELS OF ESFAS WITH NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUBLESHOOTING REVEALED THAT BA106SIAS WOULD NOT RESET . Mfr: C560 - Consolidated controls Corp / Condec Cause: THE CAUSE OF BISTA8LE FAILURE IS UNKNOWN , #0$$lBLY DE TO AGING Mod tun: 6N 220-1 . M-d id: Action: A NEW MCOULE ( MODEL CHANGE ) WAS INSTALLED . BA10651AS A2 THE ESFAS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOW 94017382 ) TKM System: ISE -Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys: ESFAS FPLSLS2 181SSW 8A1098 LOCK 00: 12/06/95 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS SHUTDOWN FOR A REFUELING OJTAGE AND DURING THE 10: 01/11/96 PERFORMANCE OF THE MONTMLY SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE OF THE ESFAS ( Appl: ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM ) IT WAS DISCOVERD THAT Dase: 8A1098 LOCK ( BISTABLE CARD FOR ESFAS S / G ($fEAM GENERATOR) PRESSURE CHANNELS ) WAS OUT OF PROCEDURAL SPECIFICATION AND COULD NOT BE Funct ESMSPR PROPERLY ADJUSTED , THl3 DEGRADED 10F 4 CHANNELS OF ESFAS . THIS HAD Dases ESFAS steam generator / main steem pressure che NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT , TROUBLESHOOTING CONFIRMED THAT SA1098 LOCK WAS FAILING LOW . ifr: C560 - Consolidated controls Corp / Cerv $ec cause: THE CAUSE OF BISTA8LE FAILURE IS UNKNOWN , BUT 15 POSSIBLY DUE TO Moc Nun: 6N 220 1 NORMAL AGING . Mod Id: Action: A NEW 81 STABLE WAS INSTALLED . 8A1098 LOCK AND THE ESFAS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED To NORMAL ( Wo#95034261 ) ( Wo#95033517 ) TKM l System: 18E Engineered Safety Features Actuation-CE Utl Sys: ESFAS I l l l
NPitG04AA* Nuclear Plant RIllability Det: System - Faltura eriff Report am Det 02/24/96 By: IMit ID value, Utility Ceaponent ID, Failure Discovery Dets Job Numbert 7366 _ Uni t_ ,, Comp,, _ Utility Component Id _ _ Dates Narratives F. /2 letSSW SA110MSIS 00: 10/26/95 Dese: WILE THE PLANT WAS SNUTDOW FOR A REFUELING OUTAGE Am DURING THE ID: 01/11/% PERFORMANCE OF THE MONTNLY ESFAS ( ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES Appl ACTUATION SYSTEM ) SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE IT WAS REPORTED TNAT TME 2s Desc: $ / G ( STEAM GENERATOR ) PANEL METER WOULD NOT CAllBRATE . THIS DEGRADED 1 0F 4 CNANNELS OF ESFAS . THERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE PLANT . Func: ESMSPR TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED TMAT TME BISTABLE CARD ( SA110MSis ) FOR THE Dxc ESFAS steam generator /moln steam pressure che MAIN STEAM ISCLATION SIGNAL 70 TNE ESFAS WAS FAILING LOW . Cause: THE CAUSE OF THE FAILED BISTA8LE IS UMrmuN , BUT IS POSSIBLY DUE Mfra C560 - Consolldated controls Corp / Condec TO NORMAL AstNG . Mod Nue 6N-220 1 Action: A NEW 8tSTABLE m s INSTALLED . BA110MS!$ AND THE ESFAS WERE Mod Id: TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . 9 Wow 95030410 ) TKM . Systems llE -Engineered Safety Features Actuation-CE P Sys: ESFAS FPtSLS2 IPWSUP ES 302/295 00: 07/30/93 Desc WHILE THE PLANT WAS AT 60% POWER , FOR WATER BOX CLEANING , AND 10: 08/26/93 WHILE TAKING ROUTlWE SHIFTLY READlWGS A CONTROL ROOM OPERATOR REPORTED App l: THAT THE 3 WT.( REFUELING WATER TANK ) LEVEL. I BICATIONS ON TM ESFAS ( Onc s ENGINEERED SAFETY FEAT _URES ACTUATION SYSTEM ) QM291 ME , FAILING LXMd Am THE emanasFL AAD TO SE MANUALLY TRIPPED ( LOSS OF 10F Fune: ESAFTKLV Y Ca 6 )l. No EFFECT ON PLANT . Disc: ESF4S refuel / borated water storage tank level Cause: TROUSLESN00TlWG REVEALED THAT A POWER SUPPLY ("18 302 / 295 ) IN THE RVT LEVEL LOOP HAD fALLE0 LOW . CAUSE UNKNOWN , POSSIBLY DUE TO Mfr: LO45 - Larnbda Electronics Div / Veeco Inst Inc ,,Aglas g Kod Nuin: LCS 2 04 Action: A NEW POWER SUPPLY ( A038 , 45E803 ) WAS INSTALLED . THE RWT "N Id: LEVEL LOOP AND THE ESFAS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL ( Wa*93020949 ) TKM system: ISE -Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys: ESFAS FPLSLS2 IPVSUP ES 402/296 00: 06/24/93 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER THE CONTROL ROOM 10: 07/15/93 REPORTED THAT LT 07 20 ( REFUELING WATER TANK LEVEL ( RWT ) Appl TRANSMITTER TO THE ESFAS ( ENGINEERED SAFETT FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEN D*scs } CHANNEL 'D' ) WAS FAILING LOW . THIS RESULTED IN A LOSS OF 1 0F 4 CHANNELS OF RVT LEVEL TO ESFAS AND MAD NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . Func: ESRFTKLV Causes TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED THAT THE LOOP SIRER RPPLY ( ES-402 / Discs ESFAS refuel / borated water storage tank level 296 ) THAT POWERS THE RWT LEVEL LOOP ( WHICH INCLLA)ES LT 07 20 ) ms MILING I M . CAUSE UNKNOWN , POS$1 SLY 0 6 AdTNG I. Kir: LO45 Lantda Electronics Div / Veeco Inst Inc Action: A NEW ( NEW MFG , MODNO ) POWER SUPPLY WAS INSTALLED . ES-402 / mod Eum: LCS 2 04 296 WAS TESTED AND RETURNED To NORMAL . ( WOW 93017906 ) ( Wow 93017766 Mod Id: ) ( PCM 137 293 ) TKM System: IBE -Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys: ESFAS
- . . _ . _ . . - ._ - - . . - - ~ . - - - -
t . l l l l NPRG04AA' Nucteer Plant R2 Liability Dita System - Failurs Srlsf Report Run Dets: 02/21/96 l Sys Unit 10 value, Utility Component 10, f ailure Discovery Date Job iksber: 7366 l 9
, Uni t_ _ Comp, ,,, Utility Camponent Id_,, _ Dates Narratives F6 42 ISIS $W J424-D 00: 04/03/95 Dese: WNILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER AND DURING THE i ID: 05/16/95 PERFORMANCE OF THE AFAS ( AUX FEEDWATER ACTUATION SYSTEM ) MONTMLY l Appt: FUNCTIONAL SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE IT WAS DISCOVERED THATg (
Desc: ESAFS (ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM) EMERGENCY FEEDWATER ACTUATION SYSTEM Colet0W LOGIC 8!STA8LE COMPARATOR CARD ) l Fmes ESAFPULG M MIP W'M M ITRI) SETPolWTY_ 'm a w MALL 8 l Deses ESFAS auxillery/amereeney feedweter actuation 7NIS 383A031 OFgetuREEWiUES".ITNIS Mb NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROL 2LESN00 TING REVEALED THAT J424 D WAS DEFECTIVE Am COULD Mfra E146 Electro - Mechanics Inc NOT BE REPA! RED . Mod Num: 33450 Cause: THE CAUSE OF THE BISTASLE COMPARATOR CARD FA! LURE 13 inananLas guy Mod Id: COULD POS$1BLY SE DUE TO NOMC"MIWWatWEL EW OEME Action: A NEW CARD WAS INSTALLED . J424 D AND THE AFAS WERE TETSTED AND System: IBE Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Wo#95009667 ) ( WOW 95008691 ) TKM r Sys: AFAS j Y , FPLSLS2 RELAY K 5318 Dos 01/14/93 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS SMUTING DOWN TO DEAL WITM OTHER MAINTENANCE 10: 03/17/93 CONCERNS IT WAS REPORTED SY CONTROL ROOM OPERATl0NS PERSONELL THAT THE Appl: ESFAS ( ENGERNEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM ) p-fA' Duc e MAS (. SAFEY INJECTION ACTUATION SIGNAL ) WOULD NOT GO INTO BLOCK MCOE ON DEMAND , THEREFORE PREVENTING THE UNIT FROM CONTINUING TO COOLDOWN Fune: ESSILG .et0$$ OF 10F 4 CNANMKSrOF ESFA$*. NO EFFECT ON PLANT Disc: ESFAS emerg. core cooling / safety inj. actuati cause: TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED THAT RELAY K 5318 ( ESFAS SIAS COMMON LOGIC )4mLED 'WUT CEAM STATF( ENERG12E ) WHEN THE ESFAS WAS PLACED Rfri 0324 - Deutsch Relay Inc / Deutsch Co IN TME BLOCK MODE . CAUSE UNKNOWN PoeslBLY DLE TO AGINer. Kod Nm: 4CP36AF Action: A NEW ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) RELAY WAS INSTALLED . THE ESFAS WAS
" 1 Id: TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOW 93001417 ) TKM System: IBE Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys: ESFAS FPL$LS2 IXMITR LT 07 28 00: 11/16/93 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT BELOW 50% POWER , FOR CORE i
10: 12/14/93 CONSERVAfl0N , AND DURING THE NORMAL 18 MONTH LOOP CALIBRATIONS IT WAS l Appt: DISCOVERED THAT LT-07 28 ( LEVEL TRANSMITTER FOR RWT (REFUELING WATER Dsse: TANK) LEVEL ) MSAW PetNgLY CRLitRATED . Wp6g ,107 4: CNANIELS OF RtFT LEMMMSNAS ( ENGINEERED SAFETY MATURES Fme: ESRFTKLV ACTUATION SYSTEM ) . No EFFECT ON PLANT . Dsse ESFAS refuel /bor'sted water storage tank level cause: TROUBLESM00 TING REVEALED THAT LT-07 28 COULD NOT BE CALIBRATED SELOW 8 . 89 MA ( MILLIAMPS } , SHOULD MAVE BEEN 4 . 00 MA . M r.f r: R369 Rosemount Inc murm , PEM6TRY ttE TO AGIRC . Mod Nm: 1153085 Action: A NEW ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) TRANSMITTER WAS INSTALLFD . LT 07 2B AND Mod Id: 115308 THE ESFAS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOW 93030755 ) TKM System ISE Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys: ESFAS i
APRC04AA Nuclear Plant R:llability 0 ta System Fcituro Bri'f Report Run Cat: 02/24/96 Sys Unit 10 - value, Utility Cogonent 10, Failure Olscovery Date Job Number: 7366 Jnit_ _ Comp _ Utility Cosponent Id_, _ Dates Warratives 4..A IPWSUP PS 18 00: 05/10/95 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT NEAR FULL POWER AND DURING THE ID: 06/07/95 PERFORMANCE OF THE ESFAS ( ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM Appl: ) MCNTMLY FUNCTIONAL SURVE!LLANCE PROCEDURE IT WAS DISCOVERED TMAT Dese: PS 1B ( POWER SUPPLY FOR THE ESFAS HIGH CONTAINMENT RADIATION CHANNEL
'B' ) HAD EXCES$1VE AC RIPPLE ON ITS CUTPUT THAT WAS BEYOUW THE Func: ESCTRA LIMITS ALLOWED BY THE MONTHLY PROCEDURE . THIS MAD NO EFFECT ON TME CHANNEL OR PLANY . TRouBLESM00 TING CONFIRMED THAT g g h !M Dese: ESFAS contalrment radiation monitor che nets g g oW ITS OUTPUT AND COULD WOT BE REPAIRED .
Mfr: A038 Acopian cause: THE CAUSE OF POWER SUPPLY FAILURE is UNKNOWN BUT COULD POSSisLY Mod Nun: 0815 35 BE DUE To AGING . Mod Id: 0815 Action: THE POWER SUPPLY WAS REPLACE 0 . PS 1B AND THE ESFAS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Wo#95011888 ) ( Wo#95013817 ) TKM System: IBE Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE e *ys: ESFAS PLSLS2 IPVSUP PS 58 00: 05/10/95 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT NEAR FULL POWER AND DURING THE los 06/07/95 PERFORMANCE OF THE ESFAS ( ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUAfl0N SYSTEM Appl: ) MONTHLY FUNCTIONAL SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT Dsse: PS 58 ( POWEL SUPPLY FOR THE ESFAS STEAM GENERATOR PRESSURE CHANNEL
'B' ) HAD EXCESSIVE AC RIPPLE AND A LOWER DC OUTPUT TMAN WAS ALLOWED Func: ESMSPR BY THE MONTHLY PROCEDURE . THIS MAD NO EFFECT ON THE CHANNEL OR PLANT Dssc ESFAS steam generator / main steam pressure cha . TROUSLESM00 TING CONF!RMED THAT PS-5B HAD EXCES$1VE AC A!PPLE Am LOW DC OUTPUT AND COULO NOT BE REPAIRED .
Mfr: A038 Acopian cause: THE CAUSE OF POWER SUPPLY FAILURE IS UNKNOWN SUT COULD POS$1BLY Mod Nun: 0815 35 BE DUE TO AGING .
' Id: 0815 Action: THE POWER SUPPLY WAS REPLACED . PS 58 AND THE ESFAS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Wo#95011888 ) ( Wo#95013817 ) TKM System: 18E Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys: ESFAS FPLSLS2 IPWSUP PS-7C 00: 11/10/93 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT 40% POWER ( FOR CORE 10: 12/09/93 CONSERVATION ) AND DURING THE MONTMLY SURVE!LLANCE PROCEDURE OF THE Appl ESFAS ( ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM ) E lRS Osse: Of3C0YERED TNAT PS 7C # PowR SLPPLY 7 FOR ESFAS CM**C' CDffAllrENT PRES $URE CAlgNIELS ) sus FAULTY Am CGAD GOT BE REPAIRED .
Func: ESCTPR TWIS'dEC6DE0"i'Of4CMAIAIELSOFESFAS.NOEFFECTONPLANT. Ossc: ESFAS containment' pressure channels Cause: TROU8LESH00 TING CONFIRMED THAT THE POWER SUPPLY WAS CUT OF
. . SPECIFICATION LOW AND COULD NOT BE REPAIRED . CAUSE UNKNOWN %gGEslBLY 4fr: A038 - Acopian ' DUE 10 AsteG .
Mod %un: 0815 35 Action: THE POWER SUPPLY WAS REPLACED ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) . PS-7C AND THE Mod Id: 0815 ESFAS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Woe 93030411 ) TKM System: IBE Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utl Syst ESFAS 2? f]D Wk lW ' I
NPRG04AA tuctccr Plant Rstlebility Data System Failura Bricf Report Run DetS: 02/21/96 l l , By: Unit 10 value, Utllity Component 10, Failure Discovery Date Job Number: 7366 ] I
. Uni t_ _ Conn, _ Utility Component Id__ _ Dates Narratives I l
l FL .,2 IPWSUP PS-7D Dos 11/10/93 Dese: WWILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT 40% POWER ( FOR CORE l ID: 12/09/93 CONSERVATION ) AND DURING THE MONTHLY SURVEILLANCE PROCEDlst! 0F THE Appli ESFAS ( ENGINEERED SA ETY FEATURES ACTUAfl0N SYSTEM ) IT WAS D:sc: DISCOVERED TISM% ( E! CWA 8WPPtT7*fk ESFAfM*3& ClWTA15ENT tetteN 4 MFAIA.YY AND COULD NOT sE REPA! RED . Fme: ESCTPR THl3 DEGRADED 1 0F 4 CHANNELS OF ESFAS . No EFFECT ON PLANT . D:sc: ESFAS containment pressure channels Cause: TROUBLESN00 TING CONFIRMED TNAT THE POWER SUPPLY WS GJT OF SPECIFICAfl0N LOW AND COULD NOT SE REPAIRED . EIN?MesTEY Mfr: A038 Acopien @M. Mod Nun 0815 35 - Actfon: TWE POWR SUPPLY WS REPLACED ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) . PS 7D AND THE Mod Id: 0815 ESFAS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Wo#93030404 ) TEM System: IBE -Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE F Sys: ESFAS FPLSLS2 ICNTRL RC 26 4 DO: 05/20/94 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER CONTROL ROOM 10: 07/08/94 PERSONNEL REPORTED THAT ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM ( Appl: ESFAS ) CHANNEL B HIGN CONTAINMENT RADIATION CONTROLLER , GC-26-4 , Dese: Tims IN
- SCAN 0WERLORD* Am MS EICP$1Rf!6!11G ANY 1Miffilf ..TNIS' 1ESULT'ED 'IN TWE LOSS OF 10F 4 CONTATISE'IfT 150LATItBI WlcMAL CNAleELS Func: ESCTRA M SFAS A m NAD 110 EfFECT ON THE PLANT .
04se: ESFAS contelrvnent radiation monitor channels cause: TROU8LESH00f!NG REVEALED THAT TNE *EPt(5tS' ( ERASA8LE PROGRAMA8LE READ ONLY MEMORT ) ( PIECE PARTS ) CHIPS S TIE CPU ( 5tf r: G063 General Atomic Co CENTRAL PROCES$1NG UNIT ) 80MD lERE SAS ( ZERO CUTPUT ) . CAUSE OF Mod Nun: RM 23 ,, EPROM FAILURE IS UNKNOWN 4' 4 Id: *p g Action: A MMbI 9dMD WifM JPROM'S WAS INSTALLED . RC 26 4 WAS - TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . * 'Jur94012733 ) TKM System: ISE Engineered Safety Features AAethon-CE Utl Sp U,D S 1 I FPLSLS2 ICNTRL RC 26 4 DD: 07/22/94 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER AND WHILE TAK!kG l 10: 08/25/94 Ra> TINE SHIFfLY READINGS CONTROL ROOM PERSONNEL REPORTED THAT THE Appl: ' ERROR' LIGHT FOR RADI Afl0N INDICATING CONTROLLER CHANNEL 'B' ( Dsse: RC 26 4 ) FOR CONTAINMENT ISOLAfl0N $1GNAL ( Cl$ ) TO THE ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM ( ESFAS ) VAS ILLUMINATED IkDICATING Func: ESCTRA , A PROBLEM WITH THE CONTROLLER . TROUSLESH00 TING RM. TEAT TE MAIN Dsse: ESFAS containnent radiction monitor channels ELECTEWIC PRINTED CIACuli 90MD ( NOTER 80MD ) MAD SAlls ('2 ERD (GAM 4 Am COJLD Not,SE jaEPAlRED 7 f1818'Chuses,$yeg4&Jt;4 Ass *0F 1 Mfr: C063 General Atomic to gcFyp 0F TE'Clt TO ESfAS . HOWEVER , THE CIS FUNCTION WS NOT Mcd Nun: RM 23 AFFECTED SINCE THE OTHER 3 CIS RADIATION MONITORING CHANNELS WERE Med Id: OPERABLE AND COULD INiflATE A CIS IF REQUIRED THis HAD NO EFFECT ON TNE PLANT . System: 18E Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Cause: CAUSE OF FAILURE IS UkKNOWN , POS$18LY DUE TO AGING . Utl Sys: ESFAS Action: THE$g@,( PIECE PART ) WS REPLACED . RC-26 4 WAS TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL , ( W0s94018440 ) TKM I
Whig 04AA Nuclear Plant R:llability Orts System
- F:ltura Brisf Report tw:Dat: 02/2i/96 Sys Unit 10 value, Utility Comporwnt 10, Falture Olscovery Date Job Nuuber 7366 t
Unit _ _Como , _,, Utility Component Id_ _ _ Dates Narratives PL. J ICNTRL RC 26-6 00 06/09/95 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER A CONTROL ROOM ID: 07/25/95 OPERATOR REPORTED TNAT % ( RADIATION I ICATING CONTROLLER FOR Amt: CONTAINMENT ISOLATION CMANNEL 'O' ). ( NO CUTPUT ) WHICM CAUSED A LOSS OF 1 0F 4 CHANNELS BUT NAD NO EffECT. % DIE T. Dese: TROUBLESN00 TING REVE,AL@MyAll IN{EM-PS3st ( PIECE Func: ESCTRA PART ghTAUSED RS 26 6 TO Fall . Causes CAUSE OF POWER SUPPLY FAILURE IS UNKNOWN , It[3G Deses ESFAS contalrunent radiation monitor chamels
~
Efrs G063 . General Atomic Co Action: A NEW POWER SUPPLY WAS INSTALLED . RC 26-6 WAS TESTED AND Mod Nue: RM 23 RETUNRED To NORMAL . ( W0895016747 ) TKM - Mod Id System: 18E Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE U "ys: ESFAS FPLSLS2 lxMITR RD 26 3 00: 03/29/94 Dese: ww a ,.' ptANT WAS SHUTDOWN FOR A REFUELING OUTAGE IT WAS 10: 04/11/94 REP 00 4D si v..LITY MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL TNAT RIS 26-3 ( RADIATION Appl: auN! TOR PCe CIR (CONTAINMENT ISOLATION SIGNAL) ) 6845 NOT READING D:sc: 001lS$qQfff,Ila TO ZERO) . THl$ WAS A LOSS OF 10F 4 CHANNELS OF Cl3 . THERE WAS NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . Funct ESCTRA Cause: TROUBLE $' HOOTING REVEALED THAT THE RADIATION DETECTOR ( RD 26 3 ) Desc: ESFAS contairunent radiation monitor channels FOR RIM 26-3 MAD FAILED LOW . THE CAUSE IS UNKNOWN AND IS POS$1BLY OUE TO AGING'. Mfr: C063 Ger.eral Atomic Co A: tion: A NEW ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) DETECTOR WAS INSTALLED . RIM 26 3 AND 8:od tun: RD 8 RD 26 3 WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WO#94007266 ) TKM Id: System: ISE Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utl Syst ESFAS fPLSLS2 INTCPM RIM 26 5 00: 02/09/95 Desc WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER IT WAS REPORTED BY A 10: 07/25/95 TECHNICIAN THAT 4tM-26-5 ( RADIATION MONITOR FOR CONTAlhMENT ISOALTION ( Appl: $1GNAL (CIS) ) WAS INOPERATIVE ( FAILED TO ZERO ) . TE W 18LS A LOSS OF l Desc: 10F 4 CNANNELS OF ES8AS ( ENGINEERED SAFTEY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM I
) THis MAD No CrFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUBLESHOOTING REVEALED THAT AN f Fune: ESCTRA e190LAT10N SOARD ( PIECE PART ) WAS BAD .
Osse: ESF AS containment' radiation monitor chamels cause: 75E CAUSE OF ISOLATION 853 FAlt1RY IS AG!NG . Action: A NEW ISOLATION SOARD WAS INSTALLED . RIM 26 5 AND THE ESFAS 4fr: C063 - General Atomic Co WERE TESTS 0 AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Wo#95004164 ) TKM Mod hun: RM 80 Mod Id. System: 18E Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys: ESFAS l l
CC
- NPRG04AA Nuclear Plant Rsliability 0:ts System - Feituro Srlef Report Rm DIte: 02/24/96
, sy Unit ID value, Utility Component ID, Failure Discovery Date Job Number: 7366
, Uni t_ _ Comp , _ Utility Component Id _ _ Dates Narrat h # C ""*"""---m_- -
.[ ~ N:,,,_
FF 2 IBISSW Ris 26 5 2 N g eese: IsmE0lATELY FOLLOWING A PLANT TRIP ( DROPPED CEA'S_ ) THE CONTROL ID: 06/25/93 _ g AEPORT,,ED g % :2'i,,p@lAl10N.DCICMMsgu FoR cts Appt: (CONT M WT ISOLATION $1GNAL) ) APPEARED TO BE INOPERATIVE AS IT MAD Dete: W LIGHT ON AND IT DID NOT AGREE WITN OTNER SIMILAR INSTRUMENTATION . TIMMElkMW.LDBS OF 1 W 4 m ) Fme ESCTRA RADIATION MONITORING FOR CIS . ho EFFECT ON PLANT . D:cc ESFAS containment redletion monitor channels Cause . TROUSLESN00 TING CONFIRMED,Nm.O 72 M FATWAs'Is -
.~
CAUSE UN GOWN , .W A888G . 8:fr: $185 - Stipos Instruments inc/ Wheetebrator Frye Action: A NEW TYPE INSTRUMENT ( V153 , 2000 ) WAS INSTALLED . RIS 26 5 2 l i Mod Nuns 9262X WAS TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . THE OTHER 3 CHANNELS WERE ALSO l Mod Id: 9262 UPGRADED TO THE NEW TYPE INSTRUMENT . ( RIS 26 3 2 , Ris 26-4 2 , '. RIS 26-6 2 ) ( Wo#93014789 ) ( PCM 121-2890 ) TEM system: 18E Engineered Safety Features Actuation-CE ! U* 9ys: ESFAS 4 1 1 l l l
. . .- -. -. .. . = - . _ ~ _ . - . _ . _ . _ _ .
- Nuclear Plant Ritf ability Data System General Report
>r: fgrry K. Willer Report Id: NPAG00AA
~ttrida Power & Light Company Job Mulber: 7364 Run Date: 02/24/%
Rm Times 08:30 ntro &ctions he attached report was generated by your <paery of the NPROS data base. suunary of your query is ilsted below. MRY:
'ou silected the following search condition (s):
Find Falture Olscovery Dates that are after 01/01/93
$2tected System l - '
- foy A g ., g t @ -CE Satected Unit 10 is ST. LUC insre wereg26' records meeting the search condition (s).
)[$ PLAY AND SORT:
fou siiscted to run general report 4 Component f ailure grief Report fo" chste to sort the report by: sort Sequence Field Name 1 Unit 10 value 2 utility Conconent 10 3 Falture Discovery catedf gothic 9 type (letter gothic 09 mediun) codepage tidobase of gothic 9 ) I 1 I l
l l N'P AG04AA ' Nucteer Flant astiability 0 ta System Failuro Brief Report Rm 0:ts: 02/2t/96 gy: Unit 10 v2tue, Utility Component 10, Failure Olscovery Date Job NuuR>er: 7364 I Unit Comp , ,,,,, Utility Component Id Dates Narratives l . 1 INTCPM AM614CIS48 00: 11/17/93 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER , A CONTROL ROOM 10: 12/13/93 OPERATOR REPORTED THAT THERE WAS A TRIP ON THE ENGINEERED SAFETY Appt: FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM ( ESFAS ) CHANNEL 88' DUE TO THE CONTAINMENT Desc ISOLATION $1GNAL ( CIS } ACTUAfl0N MODULE T106T4t'.!M PAILigg IN THE ft!'P Comjf' ION lAEN ALL' INPUTS lERE tod . THIS CAUSED A LOSS OF 10F Funct ESCTISLC SEVERAL INPUTS TO THE CHANNEL 'R' ESFAS . NO EFFECT ON PLANT . Deses ESFAS contairunent isolation actuation ecsunon Cause: THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE AM614CIS4B MODULE TRIP WAS DUE TO A SPURICUS SIGNAL Cel CNE CIS RADIATION MONITOR CHANNEL WHILE ANOTHER Mfr: C560 Consolidated controls Corp / Condec CHANNEL WAS OUT OF SERVICE Am IN THE TRIP CONo! TION . Mod Num: 6N90 1 Action: AM614CIS44 WAS REPLACED WITM A NEW ( LIE FOR LIE ) ONE . Mod Id: AM614CIS48 AND THE ESFAS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . THE VENDOR PERFORMED FAILURE ANALYSIS TESTING OF THE AM614CIS4B MCOULE AND Syst een IBE -Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE DETERMINED THAT IT PERFORMED SATISFACTORILY . THIS REPORT NAS BEEN U" Syst ESFAS UPDATED AS PER REV 1 0F LER LER 93-009 . ( wow 93030890 ) l l FPLSLS1 RELAY APC403 C 00: 04/19/94 Desc WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER AND DURING THE ID: 05/05/94 PERFORMANCE OF THE MONTHLY AFAS ( AUXILIRY FEEDWATER ACTUAfl0N SYSTEM Appl: ) SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT APC403 C ( INITIAfl0N l Disc: TIME DELAY RELAY CARD ) WAS CAUSING A PREMATURE S / G ( STEAM GENERATOR ) LOW LEVEL TRIP ON THE CHANNEL 'C' AFAS . TWIS CAUSED A Fme ESAFPULG LOS$OF10F'4CHANNELSOFAFAS.THEREWASNOEFFECJONTHEPLANT. Discs ESFAS auxiliary / emergency feedwater actuation Cause: TROUOLESH00 TING CONFlRMED THAT APC403 C MAD FAILED HIGH AND WAS CAUSING A S / G LOW LEVEL TRIP $1GNAL . CAUSE OF RELAY CARD FAILURES c:ft: E146 Electro Mechanics Inc 15 UNKNOWN , POS$1SLT DuE TO AGING . Mod Cun: 41213 Action: A NEW RELAY CARD WAS INSTALLED . APC403 C AND THE AFAS WERE l s%d id: TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOf94009314 ) TKM I c tem: a IBE Engineered Saf ety Features Actuation-CE Utl Sys: AFAS FPLSLS) 181$$W BA301SIAS 00: 09/18/95 Dese WHILE THE PLANT WAS SHUTDOWN , AS A PRECAUTION FOR HURRICANE ERIN 10: 10/24/95 , A CONTROL ROOM OPERATOR REPORTED THE 'C' CMAINtEL OF ES8AS ( Appl: ENGilEEtte SAFETV FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM ) SISTASLE FOR MIGH 01sc: TONTA!IBENT PRESERE ACTUATION SI AS ( SAFETY INJECTION ACTUATION
$1GNAL ) (74A38151AS y WAS TRIPPED AND COULD NOT BE RESET . THIS WAS A Funct ESCTPR LOSS OF 1 OF 4 CHANNELS OF ESFAS . THERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE PLANT .
Disc: ESFAS containment pressure channels TROUSLESH00 TING REVEALEO THAT 8A301SIAS MAD FAILED AND COULO NOT BE REPAIRED . Mfr: C560 - Consolidated controts Corp / Condec Cause: THE CAUSE OF FAILURE FOR BISTA8LE BA301SI AS !$ UNKNOWN , POS$1BLT m run: 6N88*1 9LE TO AGING '. Mod to: Action: A NEW 81 STABLE WAS INSTALLED . BA301SIAS AND THE ESFAS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED 70 NORMAL . ( Wo#95025562 ) TKM System: 18E Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utt Sys ESFAS
l
. 1 EPkC04AA' Muctscr Plant R*tlability Dits System Failure trisf Report Rm DIts: 02/21/96 I By: Unit 10 value, Utility Component 10, Falture Discovery Dit3 Job Mumber 7364 Unit _ ,, Comp , ,,,,Utllity Component Id _ _ Dates Narratives j 31 ISISSVtg4303515 00: 10/13/93 Dese WNILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER AND WN!LE PERFORMING ID: 11/10/93 A SPECIAL INSPECTION , LOOKING FOR INTERMITTENT GROUNDS , OF THE ESFAS Appts ( ENGINEERED SAFETT FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM ) IT WAS REPORTED THAT D:se: 11STASLE ACTUATieN IEBLAYJOB MR IIBIS ( MAIN STEAM !$0LATION $1GNAL ) l SIGNAL TO THE ESFAS ( BA300MSIS ) AILES IN THE TRIPPED CoqlT!0N Funct ESMSPR (HIGN).TM M Y i L'S OF ESFAS W14 No EFFECT' ON Desc: ESFAS steam generator / main steam pressure che THE PLANT . TROUBLESN00 TING CONFIRMED TMAT SA308MSIS NAD FAILED NIGH . l THE CAUSE WAS ORIGINALLY BELIEVED TO BE UNKNOWN , POS$1SLT DUE AGING Mfra C560 Consolidated Controls Corp / Condec BUT AFTER FURTNER POST REPAlt INVESTIGATION %K M IETEWifM Bif5AT T Mod Cun: 6N88 1 $ ADOE. CAMEtt'Ad'NATE GAGAC 431 SA30AM888 pigne smaammunTE.
Mod id: SESleN Sf *TNE1tRNUFACTtfRE t CONSOLIDATED CONTROLS CORP *) . THE RPLACEMENT SISTASLE WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE System: IBE Engineered Safety Features Actuation-CE Causes BEEN A DIEECT REPLACEMENT FOR THE MODEL PROVIDED DURING ORIGlWAL " ' Sys: ESFAS INSTALLATION . THE NEW 81 STABLE THAT WAS INSTALLED WAS MODIFIED TO CONFORM TO THE ORIGAINAL INSTALLAT10N . THis REPORT IS SEING UPDATED ( 940926 ) AS PER THE FINAL COPY OF INE 93-072 . 16 SPARE BISTABLES WERE TESTED AND 7 MAD IN0lCAT10NS OF BEING GROUNDED . THESE WILL BE MODIFIED BEFORE USE . Action: A IEW MCDULE ( LIE FOR LIKE , AFTER N00lFCATIONS } WAS ,
'TitSTALL5p . SA308MSIS AND THE ESFAS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL
. ( WOW 93028513 ) ( WOW 93028231 ) ( WOW 93027685 ) ( 1HE 93 072 ) ( !&C LTR BK #93 014 ) ( PCM 213 193 ) TKM FPLSLS1 IBISSV AA30DISIS 00 05/06/94 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS AT REDUCED POWER ( APP 0X 62% ) FOR WATER 80X 10: 07/08/94 CLEAN!NG ANO DURING THE SEMIANNUAL TEST OF THE ESFAS ( ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION STSTEM ) IT WAS DISCOVERED TNAT;31 STABLE Appl:
)ssc: ACIUAfl0Il IEELAK 310 Fot'llstS ( MAIN STEAM ISOLAfl0N SIGNAL ) (
BA308MS15 ) M'CMSitit TE $ / G ( STEAM EEWERATOR ) PRESWRE CHANNEL func: ESMSPR ' es* IIEllCATOR TO READ liner TilAN OTER $!MILAR CANMMELS . THIS Deses ESFAS steam generator / main steam pressure cha DEGRADED 1 0F 4 CRAh EL 6 0F.ESFAS WITH NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . Cause: it0UBLEEN00 TING CONFIRMED THAT SA303MS!S MAS FAILING LOW . THE Mfr: C560 Consolidated Controls Corp / Condec CAUSE IS UNKNOWN , POS$1BLY DUE TO ACING . Mod Nun: 6N88 1 Action: A NEW MODULE ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) WAS INSTALLED . BA308MS!$ AND THE Med Id: ESFAS WERE TESTED ANO RETURNED TO NORMAL . THE 8tSTABLE WAS RETURNED TO THE VENDOR FOR REPAIR . ( W0#94011062 ) TKM System: IBE Engineered Saf ety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys: ESFAS l i 1 1 i
! LPRG04AA Nuclear Plant R:llability D:t3 System - Fr.ilura Britf Report Run D t:: 02/24/96 sy Unit ID value, Utility Component ID, Falture Discovery Date Job Number 7364 ( .Un i t_ _ Comp _ _ Utility Component Id _ _ Dates Narratives P IBISSW BA40151AS D0: 10/10/95 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS SHUTDOWN , AS A PRECAUTION FOR HURRICANE ERIN ID: 10/24/95 , A CONTROL ROOM OPERATOR REPORTED THAT THE ATI ( AllTOMATIC TEST Appt: INSERTION ) IN0!CATED THAT SA401SIAS ( BISTABLE FOR MIGH CONTAINMENT
- Dnc
- PRESSURE ACTUATION SIAS (SAFETY INJECTION ACTUATION SIGNAL) } MAD l FAILED AND WAS NO LONGER FUNCTIONAL . THIS WAS A LOSS OF 1 0F 4 funct ESCTPR CHANNELS OF ESFAS .-THERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUSLESN00 TING Desc: ESFAS contalrunent pressure channets CONFIRMED THAT BA40181AS NAD FAILED ( ZERO CUTPUT ) AND COULD NOT BE I REPAIRED .
Mfr: C560 - Consolidated controls corp / Cordec cause: THE CAUSE OF BISTABLE FAILURE IS UNKNOWN , POS$18LY DOE TO AGING Mod Nue: 6N88 1 . Mod Id: Action: A NEW BISTABLE WAS INSTALLED . BA40151AS AND THE ESFAS WERf TESTED NAND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOW 95028420 ) TKM System: 18E
- Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE U*' Sys: ESFAS 8PLSLS1 18155W 8A412ATWS 00: 10/20/93 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER AND WHILE TAKING 10: 11/10/93 ROUTINE SHIFTLY READINGS IT WAS NOTED THAT THERE WAS AN AT! ( AUTO Appli TEST INSERTION ) FAILURE IN THE 'D' CA81 NET OF THE ESFAS ( ENGINEERED Dise: SAFETY FEATURES ACTUAfl0N SYSTEM ) . T QS; g yt ,0P 4.CMAMELS OF ESFAS . No EFFECT ON PLANT .
Fme: Cause TROUBLES'H00 TING REVEALED THAT AN ATWS ( ANTICIPATED TRANSIENT Disc: WITHOUT SCRAM ) BISTABLE ACTUATION ( BA412 / ATVS ) IGULE ( ATVS IS PART OF ESFAS ) HAD FAILED LontAND WOULD NOT C:VE A TRIP SIGNAL WHEN A Mfr: C560 Consolidated Controls Corp / Condec TRIP SIGNAL WAS RECEIVED . CAUSE UNKNOWN' POS$1BLY DUE TO AGING . Mod Nun: 6N68*1 Action: A NEW ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) MODULE WAS INSTALLED . BA412 / ATWS AND u~1 id: THE ATWS WAS TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL , ( WOW 93028551 ) TKM t,r stem: IBE Engineered Saf ety Features Actuation-CE Utt Sys: ATWS FPLSLS1 IBISSW J419 C 00: 11/16/93 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT SLIGHTLY REDUCED POWER , FOR ID: 12/13/93 HIGH 8ACK PRESSURE , WHILE PERFORMING THE MONTHLY AFAS ( AUXILIARY Appl: FEEDWATER ACTUAfl0N $1GNAL ) SURVEILLANCE TEST , A CONTRL ROOM Disc: OPERATOR REPORTED THAT TMNNS 1NRJLD IIDT TRIP DN L(ni S / G ( STEAM e GEMERATM ) LEVEL . TEtt M8'A-Loss OF 10F(4:CNAluELS 0F AFAR LOW Func: ESAFPULG g LEVEL.JRIP J3AlglEL . NO EFFECT ON PLANT . Diset ESFAS auxiliary /dmergency feedwater actuation Cause: TRC'J8LESH00 TING REVEALED THAT THE SME CtanECTOR RR TIE 4419 C (
$/G{ EAM GENERATOR) q#lMUEL TRIP SISTABLE ) PC;CAgtms alRTY ,
4fr: E146 Electro Mechanics Inc Q T .11064 , P08U 1LY'9LE'.TO AGING . mw Nun: 33440 Action: 1.E EDGE CONNECTOR WAS CLEANED AND J419 C WAS RESEATED . J419 C Med Id: AND THE AFAS WAS TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( W0e93030725 ) TKM System: IBE Engineered safety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys: AFAS
rpRG04AA' Nuclear Plant Reliability D:ta System Failuro Brfcf Report Run DIt:: 02/25/ % By: Unlt ID - value, Utility Component 10, Fstlur3 Discovery 0;t3 Job Number: 7364
. unit _ _Cosp, _ Utility Component Id_ _ _, Dates Narratives 4 1 RELAY K 602A 00: 01/08/93 Desc WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER THE CONTROL ROOM ID: 03/16/93 REPORTED THAT ONE HALF OF TNE p,85 MADER VALVES W TE '88 810E "
Appl:
- g CP W 4 THEY ARE NORMALLY CLOSED AND ONLY OPEN WHEN AN ESFAS (
ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM SIGNAL ) SIGNAL IS PRESENT Dise: 4 URSS W 3.WJ CNAINEE4M ESFAS . No EFFECT ON PLANT . Cause: TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED THAT WCD11.FORp40R ( ESFAS SIAS F eet ES$1LC (SAFETY INJECTION ACTUATION $1GNAL) Colet0N LOGIC )flROJM18 4 Dese: ESFAS emerg. core cooling / safety In), actuati ALLOWING THE 'O' NEADER VALVES TO OPEN .g ameswnal , POSSISLT OLE Mfra C649 Couch , Thomas A eq, Action: E*602A WAS REPLACED WITN AN INSTALLED, SPARE . THE ESFAS WAS j Mod Nue: 4CP36AF ' Mod Id: TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL ptER MS Simi!TTEIr!. ( WOW 93000713 ) ( IhE 93 001 ) TKM System: IBE Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE U
- Syst ESFAS I I
F P'.SL S1 RELAY K503 C DD: 09/20/94 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER AND WHILE PERFORMING ID: 10/05/94 THE MONTHLY FUNCTIONAL SURVEILLANCE TEST OF THE AFAS ( AUXILLARY Appl: FEEDWATER SYSTEM ) PORTION OF THE ESFAS ( ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES Dise: ACTUATION SYSTEM ) IT WAS DISCOVERED THAfiM.E503 C ( INITIATION RELAY FOR THE CHANNEL 'C' 0F THE AFAS ) WOULD ENERGlZE BUT ITS )' Fune: ESAFPULG CONTACTS WDUlb'lIOT MAKE UP ( OPEN CIRCulf I . THIS WAS A thS OF 10F Dsse: ESFAS auxiliary / emergency feedwater actuation 4 CMANNELS OF AFAS BUT IT HAD No EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUBLESHOOTING CONFIRMED THAT THE CONTACTS FOR RELAY E505-C NAD FAILED.dygn . Xf ra P297 Potter 1 Brunfield Cause: THE CAUSE OF THE RELAY CONTACT FAILURE TO CLOSE IS*PCESIBLY Mod kun: R10E1W2 5800 10.CECLic F,ATIGUE . W Id: Action: A NEW ( LIEE FOR LIKE ) RELAY WAS INSTALLED . THE AFAS AND RELAY K503 C WERE TESTED AND RETURNED To NORMAL . ( Wo#94023960 ) T104 system: 18E Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys: AFAS l FPLSLS1 IPVSUP PS 2SAMA 00: 12/08/94 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER THE SYSTEM ENGINEER ID: 01/24/95 FOR THE ESFAS ( ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM ) REPORTED Appl THAT PS 2SAMA ( n'PO W R SDPLY IN THE ESFAS POWER DISTRU8ITION SYSTEM Dsse: ) GAS SEA 015410W ( SvDC VS 24 VDC ) . Tuls DEGRACED 10F 4 CNAmMELS
<0F 2 SPAS . THERE WAS ko EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROU8LESH00 TING Func: ESPSDI CONFIRMED THAT THE POWER SUPPLY HAD FAILED LOW .
Dase: ESFAS channel poser supply and distribution s cause: THE CAUSE OF POWER SUPPLY FAILURE IS UNKNOWN , PS 5TELY DIE TO UlW. 4 Mfr: A038 - Acopian Action: gA IIEW 90ER SUPetY las-15 STALLED . PS 2SAMA AND THE ESFAS WERE
% Num: KDE 1907 TESTED AND RETURNED To NORMAL . ( Wo#94030834 ) TKM .
Mod Id: System: ISE Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Uti Sys: ESFAS w-
dRG04AA - Nuclear Plant Rillabillty Dita System
- Fellur3 Briaf Report Rm Dats: 02/21/96 l By: Unit !D a v;lue, Utility Component ID, F:llurs Discovery Dat3 JobIhmtwr 7364 l 1
l Unit _ , Comp, _ Utility Component Id _ , _ Dates Narratives ' P IPWSUP PS 207 00: 09/13/95 Deses WHILE THE PLANT WAS $NUTDOWN , AS A PRECAUTION FOR MURRICANE ERIN ID: 10/24/95 , A CONTROL ROOM OPERATOR REPORTED THAT THE ' LOW LEVEL RWT ( REFUELING Appl: WATER TANK ) 81STA8LE' FOR THE '8' CHANNEL OF THE ESFAS ( ENGINEERED Disc: SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM ) TRIPPED WHEN BYPASSED . TMis WAS A LOSS OF 1 0F 4 CNANNELS OF ESFAS . THERE WAS No EFFECT ON TME PLANT . Funct ESRFTKLV TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED TNAT POWER SUPPLY 207 ( PS 207,) m3 FAILING l Desc: ESFAS refuel / borated water storage tank level LOW AND COULD MOT BE PROPERLY ADJUSTED . Cause: THE CAUSE OF POWER SUPPLY FAILURE IS UNKNOWN , POS$15LY DUE TO ,
%fr C490 Comimtion Engg Inc AGING .
Med um ES 23-iOO Ar, tion: A NEW POWER SUPPLY WAS INSTALLED . PS 207 AND THE ESFAS WERE Mod !J: TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOW 95025017 ) TKM l System: ISE Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE
- Utl Syst ESFAS
'PLSLS1 IPWSUP PS-301A DD: 10/29/95 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER A CONTROL ROOM 10: 11/02/95 OPERATOR REPORTED REclEV!NG A GRoute FAULT ALARM AND A POWER FAIL Appl: tlGNT tus TME ' A' CIIAIREL OF TK AFAS ( AUX FEDWATER ACTUATION SYSTEM )
Dese . Tells WS A LOBS OF 10F 4 CRAINELS.0F' TIE AFAS . THERE WAS NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED THAT POWER SUPPLY 301 FOR Fme: ESAFPULG CHANNEL 'A' ('PS 301 ) MAD EXCESSIVELY HIGH AC RIPPLE ON ITS OUTPUT Dac t ESFAS auxiliary / emergency feedwater actuation AND WAS CAUSING THE Loss CF POWER ALARMS . Cause: fM CAUSE OF TIE EXCESSIVE AC RIPPLE ON TME CINPUT OF PS 301A 15 i Mfr: A048 Abbott Power Corp UNKNOWN , MESitLY BIE TO A41NG , BUT IS UNDER INVESTIGATION AT MIS Mod W m: M3005/12 AX TIME BY THE !&C TECM SUPPORT GROUP . r.od Id: Action: A NEW POWER SUPPLY WAS INSTALLED . PS-301A AND THE AFAS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL , ( WOW 95030716 ) TKM l n,,, tem: IBE -Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys: AFAS i i FPLSLS1 IPWSUP PS-303 DD: 09/13/95 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS SHUTDOWN , AS A PRECAUTION FOR HURRICANE ERIN 10: 10/24/95 , A CONTROL ROOM OPERATOR REPORTED THAT THE 'HIGH CONTAINMENT PRESSURE Appt: Cl3 ( CONTAINMENT ISOLATION SIGNAL ) ACTUAfl0N SISTABLE' FOR THE 'C' Disc CHANNEL OF THE ESFAS ( ENGlWEERED SAFETY FEATURES ACTUATION SYSTEM ) WOULD TRIP WHEN PLACED IN SYPASS THIS WAS A LOSS OF 10F 4 CHANNELS Funct ESCTPR OF ESFAS THERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE PLANT , TROUBLESHOOTING REVEALED Disc: ESFAS contairvnent pressure channels THAT POWER SUPPLY 303 ( PS 303 ) WAS FAILING LOW AND COULD WOT BE ADJUSTED TO THE PROPER VOLTAGE . if r: LO45 Lantida Electronics Div / Veeco Inst Inc Cause: CAUSE OF POWER SUPPLY FAILURE 15 UNKNOWN , POSS18LY DUE TO AGING h.. gum: Lx$ C 15 . Mod id: Action: A NEW POWER SUPPLY WAS INSTALLED . PS 303 AND THE ESFAS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL , ( wow 95025016 ) TKM System: ISE Engineered Saf ety Features Actuation-CE Utl Syst ESFAS i
JPRC04AA - Nuctscr Plant R3 liability D:ta System Failuro Sri:f Report Rtas Dits: 02/2'-/96 By: Unit ID value, Utility Component 10, Failure Discovery Date Job Nusber: 7364 , Jnit_ ,, Comp , _ Utility Component Id,_, _ Dates Narratives 1 IPWSUP PS 409 00: 02/03/93 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER AND DURING THE ID: 03/29/93 Appi: PERFORMANCE OF THE MONTHLT ESFAS ( ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES Dste: ACTUATION SYSTEM ) SURVEILLANCE TEST IT WAS DISCOVERED TNAq40P'( STEAM GENERATOR BISTABLE TRIP MODULE )MSNIFTED ITS JRETP0fsf 8715X Funct ESMSPR f 1MIBM* (4'E35AENELS 4F E9FAS f No EFFECT ON FLANT . Cause,:, TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED TNA@j0DJ POWER SUPPLY FOR SA 409 ) D:sc! ESFAS steam generator / main steam pressure che N fAlle LOW ( SWC WS;354DC h . CAUSE UNKNOWN , g{BLE 10 ' 8:fra C490 Combustion Enog Inc iod Nunt ES 23100 Action: A NEW POWER SUPPLY ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) WAS INSTALLED . THE ESFAS Mod Id: WAS TESTED A m RETlatNED TO NORMAL . ( Wo#93003819 ) TKM System: IBE Engineered Safety Features Actuation-CE tl Sys: ESFAS LSLSI IxMitt PT 09 10C 00: 06/18/93 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS STARTING UP ( < 20% ) AFTER A REFUELING OU ID: 07/23/93 Appl: THE AUX FEEDWATER ( AFW ) SYSTEM ENGINEER REPORTED THAT THEqSIERAL Dste: Fe(M FT 0910C ( PREsamE TRANSNITTER FOR FEEDWATER ( FW ) wansa STEAM GENERATOR 18 INLET PRESSUPE To THE AFAS ( AUX FEEDWATER Funct ESAFPULG ACTUAfl0N SYSTEM )MnS IETEMITTENT. AW4ES FAILING BIGN . UlBS OF 1 Dsse ESFAS auxiliary / emergency feedwater actuation O'F 4'CMAN WLS OF FW PRESSURE INPUT TO THE AFAS SUT THIS N ON THE f75 TEM OR PLANT .
#fr: R369 Rosemotnt Inc Cause: TROUBLESM00 TING IINFib TNAT PT-0910C Nm FAILED NIGN AND W tun: 1153G89 COULD Not SE REPA! RED . CAUSE UNKNOWN ,,.POSSI,MBRE TO ASING .
dod Id: 1153GB Action: A NEW ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) TRANSMITTER WAS INSTALLED . PT 0910C WAS TESTED AND RETURNED To NORMAL ( WOW 93017248 ) ftM 1, em: IBE -Engineered Safety Features Actuation-CE il Sys: AFAS .5LSI lxMITR Pf 09 100 00: 04/02/94 Dese WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER CONTROL ROOM ID: 05/05/94 Appl: PERSONEL REPORTED RECEIVING A MAIN FEEDWATER NEADER TO'S'THE STEAM Desc: GENERATOR ( $ / G ) NIGH PRESSURE SIGNAL ON THE AFAS ( AUXILIRY FEEDWATER ACTUATION SYSTEM ) CHANNEL 'D' . THE 'A' & 'B' NEADER Func! ESAFPULG PRESSURES ARE COMPARED TO IDENTIFY A RUPTURED LINE . fME INCORRECT READING CAUSED THE 'D' CHANNEL TO THINK EMERGENCY FEEDWATER WAS NEEDED D$sc ESFAS auxiliary / emergency feedwater actuation
. TROUSLESN00f!NG REVEALED THAT PT 09100 ( PRESSURE TRANSMITTER FOR FEEDWATER NEADER TO $ / G 'S' INPUT 70 INE 'D' CHANNEL OF AFAS ) W
- R369 Rosemount Inc
- . . 1153G89 EAlt.S.fli f2ININ THE HIGH PRESSURE $1GNAL . Mt 669ED' I TEM M Id: 1153GS CNAIM170 K BN TO PREVENT WATER FLOW IF A SECOND CMAINEL JAILS Wu!CN WAS A @ OF 10F 4 CHANNELS OF AFAS . WO EFFECT ON PLANT .
< stem: IBE Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE ~
t Sys: AFAS Cause: CAUSE OF TRANSMITTER FAILURE IS UNKNOWN , g@yF;8)E@A41NG . Action: A NEW TRANSMlffER WAS INSTALLED . PT 09-100 AND THE AFAS WERE TEsfED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL , ( W0e94007608 ) erM
4 NPRG04AA - Nuctrdr Plant R!Llability Dzte System - Faltura erfsf Report Atm D:ts: 02/24/96 Sys Unit ID v:Lue, Utility Component ID, Failur@ Discovery D:ts Job Ntaber: 7364 e
, Uni t_ _ Comp , _ Utility Component Id Dates Narratives F 1 IXMITR RE 26 4 00: 12/08/94 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER , CONTROL ROOM l 10: 04/20/95 PER$0NNEL REPORTED THAT4RM-)b 4*1g( READOUT MODULE FOR ESFAS l Appl: (ENGINEERED $AFETY FEATURES ACTUAfl0N SYSTEM) ,
CHANNEL 88'-CIS, , l Desc (CONTAINMENT ISCLAfl0N $1GNAL) MONITOR )!W S SEADING ERRATIC CausIN4* fjeE: ruAnast .',38_IO K PLACED IN TIE YtJP COISITION . TRIS WAS A Loss Funes ESCTRA 0F[lF JgteFAS ,.TNEAE MAS NO. EFFECT ON TIE PLAIFE; . Onc: ESFAC containment radiation monitor chamels TROUBLE $N00TlWG REVEALED fiiAT THE DlTECfGt "( RE 26-4 ~) FOR RIS 26 41 MAD FAILED ( ERRATIC AND $PlKING OUTPUT ) . l Mfra V115 Victoreen inc Cause THE CAUSE OF DETJCT.01JAILURE $ UNGOWN gJqgstgLY die l Mod Nta: 857 3 EglF W M END OF LIFE {. Mod Id: Actf W M TECTOR,WAS INSTALLED . RIS 26 4 1 A @ THE ESFAS WERE TESTED AND ltETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOW 94030816 ) ( WOf94030893 ) TKM System: ISE
- Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys: ESFAS l
l l
~PLSLS1 IXMITR RE 26 6 00: 06/02/93 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS SHUTDOWN FOR A REFUELING OUTAGE A CONTROL ROOM 10: 07/20/93 OPERATOR REPORTED THAT RIS 26 6 2 ( RADIATION INDICATING SWITCH FOR Appl CONTAINMENT RADIATION CIS (CONTAINMENT ISCLATION SIGNAL) ) WAS SPIKING Dssc: HIGN AND CAUSING SPURIOUS CONTAINMENT EVACUATION ALARMS . THIS DEGRADED 10F 4 CHANNELS OF CONTAINMENT RADIATION INPUT TO TME CHANNEL Func: ESCTRA 'D' E$FAS ( ENGINEERED SAFETT FEATURES ACTUAil0N SYSTEM ) .
Disc ESFAS contairment radiation monitor channels Cause: NO EFFECT ON PLANT . TROU8tESH00 TING REVEALED THAT THE HIGH VotTAGE REGULATOR TUBE ( PIECE PART ) FM RE 26-6 ( RADIATION DETECTOR Mfr V115 Victoreen inc Fat ruam*I 'O' ESFAS Cl3 ) RAD FAILED AND WAS CAUBING TIE SIGNAL Mod 5:ta: 857 3 f $ PIKES TO RIS 26 6 2 . CAUSE UNKNOWN , POS$18LY DUE TO AGING . Mcd Id: t Action: A NEW NIGH VOLTAGE REGutATOR TU8E WAS INSTALLED , RE 26 6 , f Als 26 6 2 A @ THE 'D' CHANNEL OF THE E$FAs WERE TESTED AND RETURNED i cem: ISE Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE TO NORMAL . ( WOW 93015815 ) TKM l Utl Sys: ESFAS FPL5LS1 lxMITR RE 26 6 00 09/11/94 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER THE CONTRC1. ROOM ID: 12/07/94 REPORTED THAT. RE 26-6 ( CONTAIIBENT RADIAfl0N DETECTOR FOR TE CIS ( Appt: 10NTAllBENT ISELAfitNI SleNAL ) ESFAS -(ENGlWEERED , SAFETY PEAflRES
~
Dsses s ACTUATim SYSTB0 SleNAL To cuanam sos ) WAS SPIKING NIGil CAU5ING AfWALIS CIS ALAN S . THis DEGRADED 1 0F 4 CHANNELS OF ESFAS . THERE Funct ESCTRA WAS NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUSLESH00 TING REVEALED THAT THE Dsse: ESFAS containment radiation.nonitor channels DETECTOR WAS FAILING AND WAS CAUSING ThE $ PIKES . Cause: THE CAUSE OF DETECTOR FAILURE IS UNKNOWN , POS$18LY DUE TO AGING ifr: V115 - Victoreen Inc .
> ha: 857 3 Action: A NEW DETECTOR WAS INSTALLED . THE ESFAS WAS TESTED ANO RETURNED Mod Id: TO NORMAL . ( W0e94023236 ) TKM .
System: 18E
- Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utt sys: ESFAS l
l G
.NPRG04AA By: Nucle r Plant RStiability 0:t3 System - Failurs Bri".f Report Unit 10
- value, Utility Caponent !D, Falture Olscovery Date Run Date: 02/24/96' Job ktauber: 7364
. uni t,,,,
,, Comp , _ Utility Component Id_ _ Cates Marratives ILS1 INTCPM RIS 26 3 1 00: 04/20/93 Desc Appt: ID: 05/19/93 WHILE THE PLANT WAS OFF THE LINE FOR A REFU THE PERFORMANCE OF THE NORMAL CUTAGE LOOP CALIBR Diser DISCOVERED THAT THE HIGH VOLTAGE ( HV ) MR WIS*2 Func: ESCTRA READOUT MODULE FOR Cl3 (CONTAINMENT ISOLM4tGIA NEEDED 70 SE REPAIRED . LOSS OF 405 4 CHANNELS FOR C!t . NO EFFECT ON PLANT .
Disc: ESFAS containment radiation monitor charnets cause TROUBLESM00 TING REVEALED THAT AN ELECTRONIC Mfr: V115 Victoreen Inc PART ) IN RIS 26 31 NAD FAILED LOW , CAUSE UNKNOWN POS$15LY 00 Mod Cuu: 856-3 AGING . Mod Id: Action: THE ELECTRONIC COMPONENT WAS CHANGED , RIS 26 31 WAS T RETURNED To NORMAL , ( Wo#93011875 ) TKM System: IBE Engineered Safety features Actuation-CE Jtt Sys: FSFAS R$LS1 INTCPM RIS 26 3*1 00: 08/07/93 Dese: Appt: 10: 09/24/93 WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER A C Disc: OPERATOR CHANNEL 'A' REPORTED THAT THE RADIATION INDICATOR CIS ( CONTAINMENT ISCLATION SIGNAL F4M9 BISPLMIN ERRATIC SIGNAL , THIS ONLY DEGRADED 1 0F 4 CHANNELS OF CIS . Func: ESCTRA ON PLANT DUE'To REDUNDANT OPERASLE CHANNELS . Dase: cause: R$F4 contairvnent radiation monitor channels TRCUSLESMOOTING REVEALED THAT RIS 26 31 ( RADI FOR CONTAINMENT ISOLAfl0N SIGNAL FOR 'A'CHANNEL
) HAD A BAD ( ERRATIC Mfra V115 Victoreen Inc OUTPUT ) NV ( HIGH YOLTAGE ) REGULATOR TUBE ( PIECE P 2d Num: 856 3 Action:
tod Id: A NEW MV TUSE WAS INSTALLED . RIS 26-3 1 WAS TE 70 NORMAL . ( WOW 93021567 ) TKM
.em: ISE -Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE l Sys: ESFAS iLS) INTCPM RIS 26-3 1 00: 11/05/93 Dese:
10: 12/09/93 WHILE THE PLANT WAS 0,N THE LINE AT FULL POWER A CONTROL ROOM Appt: OPERATOR REPOTED THAfk,1Sp31 ( RADIATION READOUT MODULE FOR D$sc: CHANNEL 'A' CIS (CONfDWlEWT ISDLATION SIGNAL) ) WAS BRIEF Funct ESCTRA MIGN ( ERRATIC ) AND CAUSING A CHANNEL ' A' CIS ALARM Osse: DEGRADED 1 0F 4 CHANNELS OF C!s . No EFFECT ON P CPERA8LE CMANNELS , ESFAS contalrnent radiation monitor chamels cause:
'*r: V115 Victoreen Inc TROU8tESH00 TING REVEALED THAT THE VOLTAGE R PART ) WAS SPIKING NIGN CAUSE UNKNOWN , POSSl8LY OUE TO AGING n: 856 3 Action:
J Id: REPLACE 0 VOLTAGE REGULATOR TU8E . RIS-26 3-1 WAS RETURkED TO NORMAL , ( Wo#93029976 ) TKM
. tem: 18E Engineered Safety Features Actuation-CE Sys: ESFAS A
- . _ . _ -- .. . _ _ _ - . _ ~ ___ - _ . . _ . _ _ - - -
i . l . tPRG04AA ' tucteer Plant R3llability D:t3 System Fcitura Orl6f Report Rtn 0:ts: 02/24/96 Sy: Unit ID value, Utility Cemponent ID, Failure Discovery Date Job Ikaber 7364
, Unit _ _ Comp _ ,;,, Utility Ccaponent Id_ _ Dates Narratives F' '1 INTCPM RIS-26 3 1 00: 12/21/93 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AJ FULL PO ER , CONTROL ROOM ID: 01/11/94 PERSONNEL REPORTED THAT RIS ak3 1 ( itADIATION Y.ADOUT MODULE FOR Appt CHANNEL ' A' CIS (CONTAINEWT ISOLATION SIGNAL) ) WAS PERIODICALLT D:sc: SPIKING NIGN CAUSING A CIS ALARM . THIS DEGRADED 1 OF 4 CHANNELS OF CIS . NO EFFECT ON PLANT DUE TO OPERA 8LE REDUNDANT CHANNELS ,
Feet ESCTRA Causes TROUSLESN00 TING CONflRMED THAT RIS 26-31 WAS SPIKING NIGN . I Deses ESFAS containment radiation monitor channels CAUSE OF FAILURE IS UNKNOWN SUT THE STSTEM ENGINEER WAS NOTIFIED ST THE NPRDS DEPARTMENT ( AFTER THE FAILURE OF 00931105 ) TNAT THERE WERE Mfr: V115 Victoreen inc THREE PREVIOUS $1MILAR FAILURES ( WITHIN THE LAST TEAR ) 0F TN!$ Mod Nue 856 3 COMPONENT . NE STATED TNAT IF ANOTHER SIMILAR FAILURE OCCURED TNAT THE Mod Id: ENTIRE COMPUTA?!ONAL MODULE WOULD SE CMANGED OUT . Action: A NEW CGEPUTATIONAL MODULE ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) WAS INSTALLED . System: IBE -Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE RIS 26 3 1 WAS TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . THE DETECTOR WAS ALSO Utl Sys ESFAS CHANGED AS A PRECAUTION . ( W0e93033684 ) TKM FPLSLS1 INTCPM RIS*26 5 1 00: 04/30/93 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT UAS SMUTDOWN FOR REFUELING AND DURING THE ID: 05/19/93 PERFORMANCE OF THE NORMAL QUTAGE LOOP CAllBRATIONS IT WAS REPORTED Appl: THAT THE lt!GN WOLTAGE SUPetY FOR RIS 26 51 ( RADIATION READOUT MODULE Dsse: FOR Cl3 (CONTA!Is ert ISOLATION $!0NAL) WAS LOW AND NEEDED TO SE REPAIRED . LCSS OF 1 0F 4 CHANNELS OF RADIATION MONITOR FOR CIS . NO Funct ESCTRA EFFECT ON PLANT . DIse ESFAS contairvnent radiation monitor channels cause: TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED THAT THE MIGH VOLTAGE REGULATOR TUSE ( PIECE PART ) MAD FAILED LOW AND COULD NOT BE REPAIRED . CAUSE UNKNOWN Mfr: V115 - Victoreen Inc , POS$!OLT DUE TO AGING . Mod Nue: 856*3 Action: A NEW NIGN VOLTAGE REGULATOR TUSE WAS INSTALLED , A15 26 51 WAS Mod id: TESTED AND RETURNED 70 NORMAL . ( WOW 93012812 ) TKM
, tem: IBE Engineered Gefety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys: ESFAS FPLSLS1 INTCPM RIS 26 5 1 00: 05/01/93 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS SMUTDOWN FOR REFUELING A CONTROL ROOM OPERATOR 10: 06725/93 REPORTED THAT RIS 26 5 1 ( RADIATION INDICATING MODULE FOR Cl3 Appl: (CONTAINMENT ISOLAfl0N S!GNAL) ) WAS READING BELOW ZERO . THIS CAUSED Disc: THE LOSS OF 1 0F 4 CHANNELS OF RADIATION MONITORING FOR CIS . NO EFFECT ON PLANT .
Func ESCTRA Cause: TROUSLESN00 TING REVEALED THAT A SIGNAL INPUT WIRE WAS BROKEN ( Dsse: ESFAS contalrvnent radiation monitor channels OPEN CIRCUIT ) INSIDE Tlif FIELD CABLE CONNECTOR ( ASSOCIATED DEVICE )
. matte' Okt 5UND 5 SE DRIED OUT Als BRITTLE 9tX TO ASING ..
Mfr: V115 Victoreen inc Action: THE FIELD CA8LE CONNECTOR WAS REPAIRED . RIS 26 5 1 WAS TESTED
. run: 856-3 AND RETURNED TO NORMAL , ( WOW 93013009 ) TKM Mod Id:
System: IBE -Engineered Safety Features Actuation CE Utl Sys ESFAS i l l I
l
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Implementation of the NRC Maintenance Rule, in accordance with NUMARC 93-01,
, " Industry Guideline for Monitoring the Effective. ness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants," requires events having an impact on systems within scope be evaluated to I determine if they are Maintenance Preventable Funcbonal Failures (MPFFs). The following inehodology provides guidance to be used when making MPFF decmons q ' Figure 1 is provided to assist in MPFF doterminations. The intent is that the MPFF l l
4 decision making process use the basic causes found on Figure 1 to determine is a Functional Failure is maintenance preventable. Figure 1 was developed to be l consistent with the Event Casual Factor Categories found in Appendix A of INPO Good l Practice OE-907," Root Cause Analysis. , i l I d i 2.0 MPFF Determination Guidelines j FUNCTIONAL FAILURES 4 ~ A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not i capable of performing its intended function. Intended function is defined as ..the function (s) performed by the SSC,as listed in the MR, that required its inclusion within the scope of the rule. For SSC's that have Plant Level Performance Cnteria such as SCRAMS, the intended function is to not cause a SCRAM. Failure that results in an event covered under a Plant Level, such as Unplanned Safety ' System Actuation, would be a functional failure. Loss of function can be either direct, i.e., the SSC that performs the function fails to perform its
- intended function or indirect, i.e., the SSC fails to perform its intended function as a result of another SSC (safety related or non-safety related).
if a functional failure recurs during post maintenance testing but before retuming the SSC's to servica, it could be indicative of unacceptable corrective actions but is not considered another functional failure. t Intended function is further defined as a demand function or run function. A conscious decision to make a function unavailable is not normally a functional failure. Failure to meet a Technical Specification is not automatically a loss of function. An evaluation of the event may find that system design criterion was met even though the TS acceptance enteria was not. i
t J Failure during a test must be evaluated to determine if the same would have occurred dunng a true demand or in absence of the test condibons. If so, the failure is a funcbonal failure. Failure of a redundant component is considered a funchonal failure if the conpi..it is 1 of 2, or requires 2 of 3 comcukre. MAINTENANCE PREVENTABLE A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not capable of performing its intended function and should have been brevented by the performance of maintenance actions by the utility, i i The cause of the failure is attnbuted to a maintenance-related actmty.
~
Maintenance includes not only those actmties traditionally associated with identifying and correcting actual or potwntially degraded conditions, i.e., repair, surveillance, d4 agnostic i examinations, and preventive measures, but extends to all supporting functions for the conduct of these activities, i Examples cf Maintenance Preventable: l 1
-Implementation of incorrect maintenance procedures. i
-Incorrect implementation of correct maintenance procedures l
-Incorrect implementation of maintenance performed without procedures considered within the skill of the craft.
-Failures as previously documented by Operating Experience that could have been precluded by an appropriate and timely maintenance activity.
-Failure to perform maintenance activities that are normal and appropriate to the equipment function and importance.
Eramoles that are not Maintenance Preventable:
-Initial failures due to OEM design and manufacturing including initial electronic piece part early failures.
-Infal failures due to design inadequacies in selecting or applying commercial or "off the shelf' dWgned equipment.
-tratal failures due to inherent material defects.
-Operational errors and extemal or initiating events.
-Intentional run to failure.
Corrective maintenance based on the Pass / Fail of a surveillance test is not considered a MPFF unless the equipment could not have performed its function, e.g., check valve leak rate 1
- i
L test. Although the component has exceeded a defined condition, maintenance is only performed once that condition is exceeded Components being out of specifcabon (e.g. breaker trip times) is not considered a MPFF unless the equipment could not have performed its funcbon. . Paciong leakage is not a MPFF unless the equipment could not perform its funcbon Minor leaks will be considered MPFF's if the valve funcbon is to prevent radiological releases. Funcbonal failure of a component that can be demonstrated to be a first time event (plant and industry) and the plant had no reasonable way of expecting an occurrence (vendor manual or related experience), will not be tallied as an MPFF against a Performance Criterion. However, it will be tallied as part of the repeat MPFF count. Refer to Figure 1, MPFF Program Areas and Basic Causes, for the determination of Maintenance Preventable based on functional failure basic cause. e e l l l l l l 1
eu i s r e ap mp . em.mp v e_- -
- m. - .qe : m,e.e e c,
- e .
_1 s,- - r e- .- r u n
, m wW a- w ,
e^ . o. s
.i .m-m.. . .
w _. .. - e e _ .e, e m L _m.r_ _t- , _ t d oe _ Nt a i o ee r l
- m. .,,
=
p
=
aR _ 1 -
= t e
- - m.
p
=
=
ac h n . o t 9' * - a
=
h,'*** e. e.s e m ;z "4====
- ^
sn ee ~ _ au st un n
. e
- aia o _
e- = CM o S E .
=
=
==*s ,. ,
.i .,
e ,,., , . S ,
, =8=.
U , . . 08 j _ A 1 _y _ s a-C _s _r Q, mr r- _ _e _ C _e s , , ** I
;ge_ a. m .,, ,,
S ' , A ~ n B D
- pl _
1 N . 1 EA -.
'm e
e m a.
. .i e
d-RS 1 eJ wm O s e , r - e r s .- UA =s,m-1 sP r ,, 1 _t- t_ e cn e u
- c_- _
GE I R
. -e e
_ a,
=
_.r. v
=-
=
s u FA .e.l a nCa _1-
^_ m.
* , r.
.r e . s .-
. a, . )
*a 7 _- * .- -
M , > , , - ed A w_ t ne c R
*a i t G aa O fl ~
. Mle '
R R E _, _ ,
=
f _As ,
.s
- P -
e s - .e < - F 1 w
- - m. m , s u.;
F
.r_
r u f . Nm P
. ,, w : = - .
e u.
. .=- -
M _7 _asr 7: w.=
. p
- _ =,
m.== e n
^_ '
= -
1 - )0 e.
==
= ns =
^
8 n o ^ _= = v
- -e _. -
=
r h== a= C m. s .i
* - p ,
,P em ,
. ms.r:- E "
o e s. , i
,o :
m*= _e. e e. . y mu
.m m_ es -
1 _,,g m **
- *3- _
,. _ w w=..as %s o- 1 n. c._* = e.
n P m s e.
- m. c w..
. _ N 8.We.'""
- __
' W
*r=== = s. 1_
. - ' W
,,r- -
W _r _=~r s=
- _m
,,e
_,s ;1= 1 = _
- n. n er=
=
, c =, ==c e
-_ m:
- P t
P"
EXA rriPLE f~r G u f>E Y M d . . . SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR #f - SSC: 9b - Auxiliary Feedwater Status:(a)(2) Updated: 14 March,1996 Performance Monitorina Period: Previous 12 months for OOS hrs & LERs,36 months for all others. Performance Criteria: Unavailability: U1& U2 <88 hrs /yr per A&B train 168 hrstyr per C train (OOS hrs - 12 month period) Reliability: 51 Repetative MPFFs, and 5 2 unrelated MPFFs per train,36 month period. PLPC 3: 51 unplanned and LER reportable ESF actuations last 12 months. (Exludes AFAS) UNAVAILABILITY:
, t O r g ;,;; x .; gay 3 2 w ; i. . - _ ; ;; .
02mMEh . Freizm .23mspiMi 4 p r m e .7.; :, VM^$, , '. " M3 .. 3mq y , . :. S,F,.' k.t NME L2.:2+h TsW44WEiL k;JW@*EiM% K:,N' L_4 S , r
~
, 7
. 4 4 .
REALIABILITY: List all train failures, corrective actions and MPFFs (attach ADM 17.08 Figs, STARS, etc.) 2C AFW train 2/27/93 - SE-094 grounded by water intrusion, valve may r it have stroked dunng valid demand. 3/13/96 - SE-09-4 failure to open during surveillance testing. Cause due to intermittent keyswitch fault. (Root Cause Report SCE 96-10) 11/6/95 - MV-09 Broken torque switch discovered dunng testing. Possible MPFF. 9/20/95 - MV-08-3 inp hook and latching lever indicated excessive wear causing a trip of the mech over speed trip mechanism. Loss of 1 of 3 trains AFW. Cause appears to be normal wear. Possible MPFF 9/15/95 - CKT BKR 60903 for MV-08-13 shorted due to water intrusion causing loss of 1 of 3 trains of AFW. Switch was replaced, new gasket installed on junction door. Possible MPFF. 2A AFW train 3/1/94 - 2A AFW motor breaker would not close due to broken cottor pin. Possible MPFF PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE CRITERIA-0 Unplanned LER reportable ESF actuations for the past 3 years . Trends: 28 AFW-(35.8 hrs unavail. Aug 95) caused Q3 95 spike. 2C AFW - (51.5 hrs unavail. Sep 95 due to corrective maintenance) reason for Q3 95 spike. ~ 4 functional failures (not all maintenance preventable) on C AFW train in past 3 years. Recent aoolicable Industry information: INPO SER 4-95,
- Terry Turbine Govemor (Woodward) Valve Stem Binding"
. _ _ . _ . . _ . . _ ___ _ _ . _. . . _ _ = _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ __ _ .. _ . _ _ .
'. SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: Status:(c)( ) Updated:
Performance MonMortna Period: Performance Criteria: Unavailabily Reliability: PLPC : l UNAVAILABILITY: 1 l l RELIABILITY: I i PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Trends: Recent soolicable industry information:
l REMDRAET 2 PRoCEDUMARifMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAGE: THE MAIN TENANCE RULE 30 of 36 ' I ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
" M E N 2iB ST. LUCIE PLANT l
FIGURE 4 (Page 1 of 2) Goal Setting and Monitoring Unit: 1 2 Date: Risk Significant: 0 Yes o No SSC: Reason for Goal Setting: Performance Criteria Not Met Which criteria were not met? Description of Events: Repetitive MPFF (attach Figure 3 for each failure) l Explain how failures are repetitive. 1 Were previous corrective actions inadequate? d i References (attach): Does this SSC require (a)(1) status? O Yes o No System Owner Yes - signature of Expert Panel Member Maintenance Rule Coordinator No - signature and reason why not Expert Panel Chairman
REVIDEAET 2 PROCEDUNMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAGE: c THE MAINTENANCE RULE 31 of 36 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE "EN.TiB ST. LUClE PLANT FIGURE 4 (Page 2 of 2) Goal Setting and Monitoring (continued) Root Cause Analysis: Assigned to: Corrective Actions and Responsibilities: Assigned to: I 1. 2. 3. 4. Goal Setting and Monitoring: For each corrective action, there should be a goal to be attained that shows the action was correct, monitoring for a follow-up period to verify success, and a discussion to show how PSA and industrywide operating experience were used in the process. Goal Monitoring method & frequency Date PSA/ industry Exp
- 1. 1.
- 2. 2.
- 3. 3.
- 4. 4.
Prepared by: System Owner Date ! Review and Concurrence: Maintenance Rule Coordinator Date l Review and Approved: ! Expert Panel Chairman Date j
PM 96-03-545_ SiSC: UNIT 2 ESFAS SYSTEM OWNER - __R SHERMAN 4/18/96 19 ITEMS REPORTED 6 ITEMS............WERE ASSOCIATED WITH RADIATION MONITORING. SYSTEM OWNER F.GUSMANO 4 ITEMS ...........WERE ASSOCIATED WITH ACCOPIAN DB15-35 POWER SUPPLIES.THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER FAILURES IN PREVIOUS YEARS ,ALL WITH SIMILAR SYMPTOMS: CRACKED CASES;HIGH A.C. RIPPLE. THIS IS NOT A MPFF ISSUE. I&C IS LOOKING FOR A REPLACEMENT POWER SUPPLY WITH A HIGHER RATING. 3 ITEMS . ..... ...WERE ASSOCIATED WITH OBSOLETE BISTABLE MODULES MODEL 6N-220-1.THEY ARE BEING REPLACED WITH MODEL 6N 598 ON AN AS FAIL BASIS. 3 THIS IS NOT A MPFF ISSUE. 2 ITEMS ...... ....WERE ASSOCIATED WITH OBSOLETE POWER SUPPLIES - MODEL LCS 2-04.THEY ARE BEING REPLACED VIA PCM 137-293. THIS IS NOT A MPFF ISSUE. 2 ITEMS ...........WERE ASSOCIATED WITH AFAS. SYSTEM OWNER M. LAW. 2 ITEMS.... ... ..THE REMAINING TWO ITEMS WERE UNRELATED ,AND AT THIS TIME ,ARE CONSIDERED TO BE RANDOM ISOLATED ; CASES, WITH NO HISTORY OF FAILURE. I i l i e
- I
ESFA ILURES UNIT #1 ESFAS BISTABLE'S UNIT #1 ESFAS POWER SUPPLIES CHANNEL "C" CHANNEL "D" ECHANNEL"A" CHANNEL ~B" CHANNEL "C" CHANNEL "D" CHANNEL "A" CHANNEL "B"
- 2. 5. HIGH 10.
CONTAINMENT CONTAINMENT 8. POWER CONTAINMENT 11. STEAM
- 1. RAD MON. PRESS. SIAS PRESSURE DISTRUBITION 7. SIAS PRESSURE GEN.
- 3. MSIS MAIN NEW. PWO# 5480 STEAM PRESSURE ISOL? )N BLOCK pK3NAL 6. ATWS 9. RWT 4./ ASIS MAIN NEW PWOSTEAM # 5479( ~
PRESSURIZER ISOLATION PRESSURE SIGNAL 04(b e Page 1
~
- i
.* PMAl Form Version: 0 -
I
,1 Corrective Action Form PMAl Site:ESL
~~
Source Number: PM96-03-547 Document: WALCHESKI PMAl REO Originator:SCE Due Date: 3/29/96, Assigned Deptartment: g IC/CONNFt i HIEGAL Q implementor Name Unit Outage Mode SNO NCR OWA
Description:
MAJNT. RULE WAS PERFORMED TO 10 POTENTIAL FUNCTIONAL FAILURES. NPRDS/ PASSPORT DATA REOUIRES FURTHER EVAL; REVIEW AND ID MAINT. PREVENTABLE FUNCTIONAL FAILURES CASES; LIST OCCURENCES ON, OR ATTACM TO SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR. EXJGUIDANCE ATTACHED. ] RPS:1D ANY REPEAT MPFPS (SAME CAUSE) OCCUR. REVIEW RESULTS WITH SSC PERFORMANCE CRITERIA. IF ANY PC IS EXCEEDED COMPLETE FIG 4. l Acceptance Section l Status / Comments: A _A , 1 I understand and accept responsibility of the above listed achon and due date
- Department Manager Bignr.ture l
gue Date Extensionaransrer Responsibikty Requests l Appvd By Extend To Date Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Onginator/Date Manager /Date txtena io vate Kequest Dy /vate supervisor /uate vnginator/vate Manager /vate Reasons: Appvd By XF LK Resp. To Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Manager /Date Recip#ent/Date Reasons: j Completion Section j , Completion Date: Close-Out Oxuments: Comments: b / cd@e e AIPR DG / /MS/Joki M ,
/ , %? l Obbct Ab dr-ou daudr.
~/ n . .
Comp %ted By: / { h {ISbbEI-Date: Wl2/ & Re_ed ,,; SLT~ , 2C d @ % Da,.; e40%
.pp,o.ed e, Ja&d , m - ns& e. .: 4/46 me_ed e, A. ,M , G ,as +s h, ea,. 4/A '
29
%, , Nucteer Plant B*Liebility Dite System ~~
Generet Report
,Fers ferry E. Miller Report Id NPAG00AA Florida Power & Light Company Job Muuher 7267 Run Date: 02/23/96 Rm Times 13:49 Introex t ion The attached report wee generated by your query of the NPROS date beoe.
A summary of your query is listed below. , outRY: fou sstected the following search condition (s): Selected System is Ad find Felture Discovery Dates that are ef ter 01/01/93 Selected Unit ID is ST. LUCIE 1 I ~ thsre were,Trecords meeting the search condition (s). 3ISPLAY AND SORT:
'ou satectori to run generet report 4 Congonent Failure Ref ef Report You chose to sort the report by:
Sort Sem ance Fletd Name { 1 Unit ID value 2 Utility Ccaponent ID 3 Feiture Discovery Datedf gothic 9 type (letter gothic 09 medium) codeooge tidobese of g thic9
WPRG04AA Nucicer Plant Rstlability D t3 System
- Psiluro Selsf Report km Dats: 02/Z3/9[
By: Unit 10 value, Utility Cosponent ID, Failurs Discovery D:t3 Job Number: 7267 yni t _ ,como, _ Utility Component Id _ _ Dates Narratives . r-* nS1 lxMITR DET 7 00: 08/13/93 Dese WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER THE CONTROL R004 10: 08/27/93 REPORTED RECElvlNG PRETRIP ALARMS ON THE RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION Appts - SYSTEM ) CNANNEL 'C' TM / LP ( THERMAL MARGlu / LOW PRESSURE ) , LPD ( Dise: , LOCAL POWER DENSITY ) , As NI POWER IISTABLES . IT MS DETERMINED THAT THE ASI ( AXIAL SMAPE IICEX ) READING WAS DRIFTING AND CAUSING Fme: RPPWRGNM THE A . 42RNWL 898-SP M EPS Mht ababgem m Discs RPS power range neutron agonitor channels I Causes A M:1 W 4' RER9'N* . NO EFFECT ON PLANT . TRt1SLESWOOTING
~
Yl REVEALED THAT K4 Nf= J ,gfMT MM CM~*(i' Rfra COTT Gassna / Metrics Mod Nue A2
\ [,/ aMW @YS GAMW.*)f. CAUSE remnamas , PosSIBLY
} htE TO AGING .
Mod Id: Action SECAUSE OF TME LOCATION OF DET 7 IT CANNOT BE ruamern Clf" UNTIL d THE REACTOR iS SMUT DOWN . AT THE NEXT QJTAGE DET 7 WILL BE CNANGC System IBD Reactor, tion CE OUT WITN A NEW DETECTOR UNTIL THEN THE TM / LP , LP0 , AND Mi PWER
< utt Sys RP SISTA8LES ON CHANNEL 'C' 0F THE RPS WILL BE TEMPORARILY PLACED IN THE TRIPPED CONDITION . ( Wo#93021123 ) ( INE 93 054 ) Tiot kY b/E2W M. bhVf&O Qq/ h.
I FPLSLS1 lxMITR DET 8 00: 06/01/95 Deses WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER A CONTROL ROOM 4 ID: 11/03/95 OPERATOR REPORTED THAT THE ASI ( AXIAL SHAPE INDEX ) READING WAS VERT 4 appt: ERRATIC AND WAS DRIFTING OUTSIDE NORMAL STEADT STAE PARAMETERS , TNis Dtscs DEGRADED 10F 4 CHANNELS OF THE RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION STSTEM ) . THERE WAS Wo EFFECT ON TNE PLANT . Tamassemnneggs agEALB TRAT Feet RPPWRCNM DETECTot M ( Off 8 ) FOR TIE 'RPS POEA RANGE LIMAR PCMCR LZVEL j DEsc: RPS power range neutron monitor channels ruaamst
- BAD A SNORTED SIGNAL CABLE Am MS CAUSING TE ERRATIC ASI
, READ M ,.
4fr: W120 Westinghouse Elec Corp / Magan Mod Num: wt 23766 \pf
~
Causes CAUSL' 0F DETECTOR FAILURE IS POSSIBLY DUE TO AGING . Action: AT THE NEXT GUTAGE A NEW DETECTOR WAS INSTALLED . DET 8 AND THE
'od id: RPS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOW 95015669 ) Tiot l
$ System: 180 Reactor Protectico- gg[ yg [fpf , { 8PLSLS1 INTCPM DW15 C2 x / DD: 06/02/95 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT MS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER AIC WHILE THE 1&C l f
- ID
- 07/25/95 DEPARTENT WAS PERFORMING THE RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM )
Apott MONTMLY FUNCTIONAL SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE THET D!$ COVERED THAT RMS-C2 Dsse: Ca p t-St B a= = == /-71YEWN4 puetts URL6 )
,M"YSB WPAIS TE AllEEPTAM CRtTRIA (
l Func: RPAPTMLP 8 ' W 1 % M 1 5 4 1 W 4 Ca m s BUT THERE WAS No Dssc: RPS high axial power / thermal margin low pres / EFFECT ON TME PLANT ,, &&iDNfdNEnk 18Fl5g mi
'ggggg,, MWM_ vd yr: 0142 - Dever inc Causes ,T,ME CAUSE OF DW15 C2 FAILURE IS UNKNOWN BUT CCRJLD PMN OUE I
mod N. ant 19 501 2 Mod id: )[ WM WmRFT, . Action: A NEW MCIMJLE WAS INSTALLED . DW15 C2 AND THE RPS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( W0e95016043 ) TKM System: 180 Reactor Protection CE [k W(,, d e 7 x / i 1 l l l
bsPRG04AA Nuclear Plant R llability D:t3 System Falturo Brief Report Rm Det): 02/Z3/96 By: Unit ID v:Lue, Utility Component ID, Fellurs Discovery D:te Job Muunser: 7267 tunit , ,,Cosso, _ Utility Component Id _ _ Dates Warratives
- D64LS1 IPWSUP ES 20/385 Dos 10/25/93 Dese: WHILC THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER A CONTROL R004 ID: 11/19/93 Apple OPERATOR REPORTED RECEIVING A TRIP ON THE RPS ( REACTCut PROTECTION SYSTEM ) CHANNEL 8A' FOR 'RCP ( REACTOR COOLANT Ptsus ) LW FLWs .
D :c:
- SGIS SW TE W8fTSTEM BT CHANGING THE REACTOR TRIP LOGIC FM 2 M EM t m W 3 e NO EFFECT ON PLANT .
Fmc: RPRCFL Cause: TRGJBLESN00TIK TEICATED TNAT PDT 1111A ( DIFFEROFTIAL PRESSLRE Desc RPS reactor content flow channeta / TRANSMITTER FOR S / .GJJ{EAM GENERATOR) 1A ) MAD FAILED LOW CAUSING g M} THE TRIP . 8W M A BLIEN,$[PIEW NRT ) Kfr F120 - Fischer & Porter Co Mod Nue: 55GL1154 gp IE G ) 90R THE PDT-1111A LOOP . CAUSE
\ UNENOWN , PosSIBLY, 6 J Mod id: 55GL1154 Action: A MEU FUSE WAS INSTALLED . ES 20 / 385 , PDT-1111A AND TNE RPS System: ISD A E TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Wo#93028847 ) Txx
-Reactor Protection CE vil sys: RPS M6
=
/5//FE - <. L/ensI*es S M M CA ey h
- M [JyJ n 9 (bf 13 nsb -LI noC. f 52ses hwa.
e 8-unwk Wsovkn, l,'Zy .
% / '
'PLSLS1 IBIS $W HICONPR A9 00: 11/03/94 cese WHILE THE PLANT WAS swuwm FOR A SCHEDULED REFUELING CUTAGE AND 10: 12/07/94 DURING A ROUTINE SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE OF THE RPS ( REACTOR Appl PROTECTION SYSTEM ) CHANNEL 'A' If WAS REPORTED THAT THE CONTAINMENT Desc MIGH PRESSURE BISTA8LE ( NICONPR A9 ) WAS IN,lTS PRE TRIP Catelfl0N AND COULD NOT BE RESET . THIS LOST 10F 4 CHANNELS OF CONTAINMENT Funct RPCTPR s D PRESSURE INPUT TO THE RPS . IF THE BISTA8LE COULD NOT BE RESET D:se: RPS contairvnent pressure channels OPERAT!!ONS PER$0NNEL WOULD NOT KNOW IF THEY MAD A VALID PRETRIP CONDITION . TMIS MAD WO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED Mfr G295 Gut t Energy & Envirere Sys Triga detr THAT THE PINS ( PIECE PART ) ON THE BISTASLE WERE DIRTY AND MAKING Mod zue: ELD 241 0000 POOR CONTACT . rod Id: Cause: THE CAUSE OF DIRTY PINS 15 UNKNOWN , POS$1BLY DUE TO AGING OR A DIRTY ATMOSPMEth IN THE CA8INETS . tem 180 -Reactor ProtectierffE Action: THE PINS WERE CLEANED . MICONPR 49 AND THE RPS WERE TESTED AND r - a! utt Sys: RPS RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOs94027575 ) TKM h W &h!D ()1Q 0{t rt/,h o tt t ,>e k o L -h haV G {ces v A NS , a . FPLSLS1 181SSW MIPRZPR A6 DD 05/21/93 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS SHUTDOWN FOR A REFUELING CUTAGE AND DURING T ID: 06/24/93 Res ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) MONTMLY ' LOGIC MATRIX' TEST OF THE Aggt: PRESSURIZER PRESSURE SISTABLE TRIP UNIT IT WAS REPORTED TNAT LIGMT W3 Dsse: DID WOT ILLUMINATE , WHICH WOULD MAVE IN0!CATED A GOCD TEST . TN!S Funct RPP2PR
$' WCULD DEGRADE 10F 4 CMANNELS OF THE RPS AS THIS WOULD CMANGE THE TRIP LOGIC FROM 3 OUT OF 4 TO 2 CUT OF A . TMERE WAS NO DJse: RPS pressuriter pressure channels Cause: EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUBLESHOOTING REVEALED TMAT THE CONNECTOR PINS ( P!ECE PART ) ON THE BISTABLE TRIP UNIT WERE ' DIRTY' . CAUSE Mfr: G295 - Gulf Energy & Envirern Sys Triga Retr UNKNOWN , POS$18LY DUE TO AGING .
w: ELD 241-0000 Action: THE PINS WERE CLEANED , MIPR2PR-A6 AND THE RPS WERE TESTED AND Mod II:: RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOW 93014636 ) TKM System: 180 Reactor Protection CE Utl Sys: RPS gg pg g/O 9[ [v/( 4Phol/R , f g., g g/g 4 v
Nucteer Plant R:llability Date System Feituro Brief Report '.cPRG04AA Rm Dets: 02/23/16 By: LMit 10 - value, utility Component ID, Felture Discovery Dets Job Ntaber: 7267 _ unit __ _ Comp. ,,,,U t i l i ty Component Id.,,,, _ Dates Narratives 8FtSLS1 151SSW NIRATE-C2 00: 11/22/94 Dese: WILE TNE PLANT WS $NUTDOW 70R A SCHEDULED REFWLIN CUTAGE AND 10: 12/07/94 DURING AN OPERAll0NS FUNCTIONAL SURVEILLANCE TEST OF TME REACTOR Appts . PROTECTION SYSTEM ( RPS } IT WS REPORTED BT THE CONTROL ROON Desc: / QPERATOR$ TNAT TE WIDE RANGE NIGN RATE OF CHANGE OF POER ( NIRATE ) Funca RPIRNM ge7 BISTASLE WOULD NOT TRIP QN DEMAND ( WOULD NOT CNANGE STATE ) . THE
'J2e CONNECTION ON TE BISTABLE CIRCUIT CARD WICN P90lF10ES AN Dese RPS intermodlete range / wide range tog neutron ENASLING FLasCTION FOR THE TRIP , WAS NOT PROPERLY COINECTED . TNIS CAUSED TME LOSS OF 1 0F 4 CNANNELS OF NIGN RATE INPUT TO TME RPS .
r.fr: G295 - Gulf Energy & Envirem Sys Trige Retr TNIS NAD No EFFECT ON TNE PLANT . mod Num ELD 241 0000 Causes TME CAust IS DUE TO PREV!0UE MAINTENANCE ACTION . A SPECIALIST Mod Id NAD RE3WWED ALL TE CONNECTIONS TO TNE DRAWER EARLIER As PART OF ANOTHER JOB As DID NOT REATTACM TNis CONNECTION CORRECTLY . System: Ito UtL Sys: RPS Reactor Protection-C ) Action THE CONNECTION WAS TIGNTNED , TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( i W0s94029189 ) TKM
-.Ag s4 awA+s.-
frLSLS1 ISISSW LIC 9013D D0: 03/29/94 Dese AFTER A REACTOR TRIP DUE T0_ PERSONNEL ERROR , CONTROL ROOM ID: 05/20/94 PannomufL REPORTED THAT. LIC 90130 ( LKWEL lelCATING CONTROLLER Appla
'SWITCNC TR TWE-*RTTEAN GENERATOR ($ / G) DOWNCOMER LEVEL ) WAS Desc: ,
READING 20% NIGN AND WAS NOT IN ALARM AS IT, SNOULD NAVE BEEN . P LIC 90130 PROVIDES INPUT TO THE REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEN ( RPS } AND Funct RPSCLV g AUNILIART FEEDWATER ACTUATION SYSTEM ( AFAS ) . TNIS DEGRADED 10F 4 S Diser RPS steam generator level channels \ / G LEVEL $1GNAL PATNS TO TNE RPS AND AFAS . THERE WAS NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT DUE TO THE REDUNDANT CHANNELS . Mfr: 5185 Sieme Instrunents Inc/ Wheetabrator Frye cause: TRoueLESN00 TING INDICATED THAT LIC 9013D NAD FAILED AND COULD WOT Mod tus: 9262 SE REPAIRED . CRACKED GEARS WERE FOUND IN THE INDICATOR DRIVE CAuslNG Mod Id: 9262 THE INDICATOR 70 SNOW 781 WHEN IT WAS 601. T518 m AIS st41RIFACTWE 1the &&&ME&CAkt?-met MIAALE . TE PLANT MAS M W-818BS PADRAM stems 100 Reactor Protection-CE 2 *N;MI se As PAft ARsts nFITE AN IWROWS REStB $ wct Sys: RPS Ac'ticn ' "NEh CONTROLLER WAS INSTALLED . LIC 90130 A m T E RPS WE [ 1ESTED Aac RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( W0s94007267 ) T104 I YOA &/ YOD l FPLSLS1 ISISSW LIC 9023C DD: 12/01/94 Deses WILE TE PLANT WAS STARTING UP , AFTER A REFUELING CUTAGE , l ID: 01/24/95* CONTROL Rotm PERSONNEL REPORTED TNAT LIC 9023C ( LEVEL Im!CATING Appl: l CONTROLLER FOR STEAM GENERATOR 18 DOWCDMER LEVEL ) WAS READING NIGN ( l Dese 853 vs 651 ) . TNIS CAUSED TWE RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) $ / G l ( STEAM GENERATOR ) LEVEL TRIP TO BE PLACED IN BTPASS . TNIS DEGRADED l Ftec t RPSCLV I 10F 4 CNANNELS OF RPS . THERE WAS NO EFFECT ON TME PLANT . Dise RPS steam generator level chamels %- TROUBLESN00 TING CONFIRMED THAT LIC 9023C WAS READING NIGN . Causer E MTE pc ( PelsTB CIMEIINN d NOT st.f r: v153 Versatite Instruments aoc tIso: 2000 21C(50 ONMS)xx i UM@MRfWY TO AGING .
@T. ) . THE CAUSE !$ UNKNOWN , POS$1BLY DUE 4
)
~
Mod Id Action: THE PC BOARDS WERE P90PERLT SEATED . LIC-9023C WAS TESTED AND l RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( W0s94030170 ) TcM System: 150 Reactor Protection-CE - Utl Sys: RPS g gy
i ( * *jPRG04AA . Nuclear Plant Reliability D:ta System Falturo Srict Report ~~ Rm D:tsi 02/23/% Sys unit 10 v:tue, Utility Comssonant ID, f ailuro Discovery Dats Job Nu mer: 7267 ( , Uni t _ _ Coup, ,,,Ut i t i ty Component Id_ ,,,Detes Marratives i FrLSLS1 ISISSW LOFLOW 83 00: 11/10/93 Dese: WNILE TNE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER CONTROL ROCM l ID: 12/14/93 PERSONEL REPORTED RECEIVING INTERMITTENT TRIP SIGNALS ON THE 8PS ( l l ppla . REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) LOW FLOW BISTABLE TRIP MCDULE . TNis WAS A l l Desc: LOSS OF 1 0F 4 CMANNELS OF RPS LOW FLOW TRIP CHANNELS . No EFFECT ON l PLANT . Funes RPRCFL Cause TRCRALESN00 TING REVEAIS TMT LOPL(ni-53 ( rs Cm 's' tsar Desc: RPS reactor coolant flow channels @ WM ) lAS PAILIIE L(El INTtmlTTENTLT CAUSING THE TRIPS . If WAS DETERMINED TMAT THE (IMECTM PlWS WRE DIRTT AB BDT IIAtlas I:fr: G295 Gulf E9ersy & Envirce Sys Trige actr 6 . CAUSg in-u , Mod Nues ELD 2410000 Action: THE EDGE CONNECTOR WAS CLEANED AND THE MODULE WAS RESEATED . Mod it . L0FLCRd-83 AW THE RPS WERE TESTED AMO RETURNED To NORMAL . ( F Wof93030401 ) TKM System: ISD -Reactor Protection CE # Utt Sys: RPS ' 5 h bo b ION '
. bih lQ npg ,
FFLSLS1 IXMITR LT 9013A 00: 08/06/95 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS $NUTDOWN , AS A PRECAUTION FOR MURRICANE ERIN 10: 09/11/95 , A CONTROL'R00M OPERATOR REPORTED THAT LIC-9013A ( LEVEL IMOICATING Appl: CONTROLLER FOR 1A $ / G (STEAM GENERATOR) LEVEL ) HAD FAILED LOW ( NO Desc CONTROL , NO IN0!CAfl0N ) . THIS WAS A LOSS OF 10F 4 CMANNELS OF $ / G LEVEL CONTROL . THERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROJBLESN00 TING Fme RPSGLV REVEALED TMAT LT-9013A ( LEVEL TRANSMITTER FOR 1A $ / G LEVEL ) MAD Desc RPS steam generator level channels FAILED LOW ( ZERO CUTPUT ) . Causes CAUSE OF TRANSMITTER FAILURE WAS DUE TO '0!L CONTAMINATION' IN Kfr: R369 - Rosemomt Inc THE DP ( DIFFERNTIAL PRESSURE ) CELL . OIL CONTMINATION WAS DUE TO A Mod Num: 1153 D04 MANUFACTURING DEFECT . FOR MORE INFORMATION SEE ROSDCJNT LETTER OF 07 Mod Id: 115300 / 22 / 86
- ee: 180 Reactor Protecti Q[ f
-CE Action: A NEW TRANSMITTER WAS INSTALLED . LIC 9013A AND LT 9013A WERE TESTED AW LETURNED TO NORMAL , ( WOf95021481 ) ( ROSEMOUNT LTR OF 07 l Un Sys: RPS / 22 / 86 ) TxM r/cTT pt/v/ f",
C CWL 4 k t) 0 v* M es M 0 LL w\on 0 i e s t. A J. Deo le m
/O ytaLM. T J Y ND . (tWVet MCPS M-Q -
FPLSLS1 IXMITR PDT 1111A Ql i 00 04/18/93 Desc WHILE THE PLANT WAS SHUTDOWN FOR A REFUELING OUTAGE ANO DURING THE ID: 05/31/93 PERFORMANCE OF THE NORMAL 18MM LOOP Call 8tATIONS If WAS DISCOVERED Apot: TMAT PDT 1111A ( DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE TRANSMITTER FOR STEAM CENERATOR Disc: , 1A ) WAS ERRATIC AND COULD NOT BE PROPERLT CALIBRATED .10F 4 Fme: RPRCFL Desc: RPS reactor coolant flow chamels [g CHANNELS OF RPS ( REACTOR Pat,TECTION SYSTEM > WAS DEGRADED . NO EFFECT ON PLANT . Cause: TROUBLESM00 TING CONFIRMED THAT PDT 1111 A WAS ERRATIC AND Ct3)LD k NOT SE REPAIRED . CAUSE UNKNOWN , POS$18LY DUE TO AGING . Mf ra 1204 - ITT Barton Instrument Action: A NEW TRANSMITTER ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) WAS INSTALLED , cal!8 RATED sym: 36S AND TESTED . POT 1111A AND THE RPS WERE RETURNED TO NORMAL , ( rodIII: 368 3011702 ) TKM System: 180 -mesctor Protection-CE MO I #7 k t b [ d nfC dI O - Utt Sys: RPS / mp, gyggg7ctm d f On { , p I
gy: Unit ID
...........ww.* sem Dite: 02/23 value, Utility Camponent 10, f ailur3 Discovery D:ta Job Numer: 7267* , Uni t_ _ Comp, _ utility Component Id,,,_ ,,,,D:t es terretivve fplStS1 lxMITR PT 1102D
- 00: 11/22/94 Desc:
ID: 01/26/95 WHILE THE PtANT Wat SafYDOWN FOR A REFUELING CUTAGE Appl: ' FILLING AND VENTING' IN PREPERATION FOR AN UPCm!NG STAR Desc: , CONTROL 8004 PERSONNEL REPORTED RECEIVING AN ALARM T A SIAS ( SAFETT INJECTION ACTUATION SIGNAL ) NAD OCCURED * . funct RPPZPR . CAUSES /. CIS ( CONTAINMENT ISCLAfl0N SIGNAL ) TO OCQJR . TH Desc RPS pressuriter pressura channets EFFECT M S TNAT THIS WAS AN UNNECESSARY CHALLANGE TO TRQJBLESN00 TING REVEALED TNAT PT 1102C ( PRESSURE TRAj Mfra R369 Rosencet Inc f PRES $URIZER PRESSURE ) NAD FAILED AND ORIFTED MIGN ( PE '
, my 10 MINUTES LATER PT 1102D ( PRESSURE TRANSMITTER FOR P Kod Nun 1153GD9 rod Id: 1153GD Ip PRESSURE FOR CNANNEL 'D'
) ALSO FAILED ( PEGGED NIGN ) . WITN BOTN (
D CHANNELS OF PRES $uRIZER PRESSURE A80VE THE 1725 PSIA B i Systems 180 Reactor Protection CE PERMISSIVE SET PolNT TME SIAS SLOCK SIGNAL WAS AUTlatATICA Utt Sys: RPS -- Causes REMOYED . WITN CHANNELS 8A8 8 'B' !NDICATING LESS THAN 1600 PS! LOW PRESSURIZER PRES $URE TRIP SETPOINT THE TWO 0F FOUR SAflSFIED A 2 A SIAS / Cl3 WAS INITIATED . PT 1102D PRESSURE Op TRANSMITTER UNDERWENT ROOT CAUSE DESTRUCTIVE EXAMIN t h'. INDICATED THAT THE ISOLAflWG DIAPMRAGMS CONTAINED MO 316 STAINLESS STEEL . MONEL !$ SUSCEPTIBLE 70 NTDROGE ft/ Ac on: h ROOT CAUSE IS NTDR0 GEN GAS WITHIN THE ISOLATING DIA AFTER THE SYSTEM !$ DEPRESSURIZED , THE NTDROGEN WILL CCME OUT OF
./
h g$. SOLUTION . TME NTDROGEN WITNIN THE ISOLAI!NG DIAPNRAGMS INDICATED INCREASE IN PRESSURE . A NEW TRANSMITTER WAS INSTALL l [ ESFAS AND PT 1102D WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMALj 335 94009 ) ( WOf94029271 ) Tot ' l FPLSLS1 INTCPM SDC A6 1 00: 07/28/95 Dese WNILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWE ID: 09/11/95 Appt: PERFORMANCE OF THE MONTMLT RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTE ! Desc b FUNCTIONAL SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE 17 WAS DISCOVERED TN l Fune: RPPvtCNN [4 DEVIATION SETPolNT' COULD NOT BE PROPERLY SET . THIS WAS Al OF 4 CHANNELS OF THE RPS . THERE WAS Wo EFFECT ON TNE PLANT Dese: RPS power range neutron monttor chamels TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED THAT CIRCUIT CARD SDC A6 ( SIGN CWy3 ) m FAILS As CGA.D NOT BE PROPERLY ADJUSTED . Mfr: G295 Gulf Energy & Enviram Sys Triga Retr Cause: THE CAUSE OF tARD FAILURE IS SRWKIB TO K AAASE . Action: A NEW CARD WAS INSTALLED . THE' lips WAS TESTED Am RETURNED To Mod Nunt ELC147 1100 NORMAL . ( Wof95020828 ) To: l System: 150 Reactor Protection CE
& & fAf & U f.
Utl Sys RPS y f/g
~~ ,
l
~
e [pRC0AAA Nuct r Plant Ratiability D:ta System Fciture trist Report Am D:ts: 02/23/96 By: LMit 10 vetus, Utility Component 10, Feiture Discovery Det2 Job Numer* 7267
] , unit _, _C omp. _Ut ili ty Component Id_,,,,, _ Dates Narratives splSLS1 IMMITR TE 1122CD 00: 12/04/94 Desc: WNILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT NEAR FULL POWER , CONTROL Rom 10: 03/25/95 PERSONNEL REPORTED TNAT TE*1122CD ( TEMPERATURE ELEMNT FOR REACTOR Appi COOLANT LOOP 182 COLD LEC INPUT INTO THE RPS (REACTOR PROTECTION
! Discs SYSTEM) ) WAS DRIFil#G NIGN . TNIS DEGRADED 10F 4 COLD LE6 )
. IEps'ERATM IWUrs Te TM EPS . THERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE PLANT . '
l Funct RPRCTl! TROUBLESN00 TING CONFIRMED THAT TE 1122CD WAS FAILING NIGN AND COULD Dise RPS reactor coolant temperature channels NOT BE REPAIRED . - Cause: THE CAusE OF THE FAILlRE 15 UNKNOWN , POS$lBLY ME TO M END Kfr: W108 Weed Instrument to inc W Lift . 8 l Mod em: N90045 2A CL g 0( 1 Action: A NEW TE ( TEMPERATURE ELEMENT ) WAS INSTALLED . TE 1122CD AND mod id: pf A4M THE RPS W RE TESTED Ale RETW aED To NORMAL . ( Wof96030322 ) To: " System: IBD -Reactor Protection CE /EG Wanis et H f2 W .r / 7 4 e.e d -e ve w/ /o Utt Sys RPS 0 Q* C '015 C h8 c.h u k n ..e .a Imdy . FPLSLS1 IXNITR TE 1122CD 00: 09/11/95 Dese: WNILE THE PLANT WAS $NUTDOWN , A_5 A PRECAUTION FOR NURRICANE ERIK l 10: 10/26/95 , A CONTROL ROOM OPERATOR REPORTED REC'EviliG SOME ERRATIC READINGS ON l Apot: THE RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) . TNis DEGRADED 10F 4 CNANNELS Disc CF RPS . TWERE WAS NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED Funct RPRCTE p# THAT THERE WAS CIL ( FROM THE RCP85 ) IN THE TERMINAL MEAD OF l TE 1122CD ( TEMPERATURE ELEMENT FOR REACTOR COOLANT LOOP 1B2 COLD LEG D2se: RPS reactor coolant tesperature channels ) WNICH WAS CAUSING THE LEADS 70 SHORT CUT AND CAUSE ERRATIC READINGS
, ON THE RPS .
Mfr: R369 Rosemomt inc s e p' Cause CAME OF OIL lufautt0N WAS DE TO A POGt GAEEET MAL IN TEE Mod um: $104 16% N Mm , P03315.7 ENT CUT IRRING PREVltR88 MIN'. Mod Id Action: THE OIL WAS CLEANED FROM THE NEAD AREA , THE LEADS WERE REINSULATED AND THE HEAD WAS SEALED BY APPLYING ' WEED SILICONE System: 180 Reactor Protection CE SEALANye TO THE THREADS OF THE NEAD COVER . TE 1122CD AND THE RPS WERE
.tt Sys: RPS TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOW 95024757 ) ( 95024334 ) ( '
19 Rc8 we '"r7'"'s'" { kJ di Hn wM Ho Gam. I I FPLSLS1 ISISSV TN/LOPR 07 00: 02/10/93 Dese: VNILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER THE CONTROL Rom ID: 03/29/93 REPORTED TNAT TSMS EM TM / LP ( TMEpWhL 10M898 g.Lind M3 Rate Apot: g ,) $ N M $l E I M 1PS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) WAS Dsse: , ERRATICALLY C:311NG IN WNILE THE OTHER 3 CHANNELS WERE WORMAL , LOSS OF Fme: RPAPTMLP \f 1 0F 4 CHANNELS OF RPS . No EFFECT ON PLANT . Cause TROUBLESN00 TING 'COULD NOT DUPLICATE' TNls PROSLEM . CAUSE Dssc: RPS high axial power /thermat margin low pres / UNKNOWN , WM TO Mfg 8 m LOW CINEECffm. Actten: M IRILE TatamLEWWW 10"TISTEE '
,Nfr: G295 Gulf Energy & Enviram Sys Triga '4ctr MM(MAR $ A4L M PIB As CLEM ME M EIMECTtRS
.od ida: ELD 241 0000 MJE N CIMBETF's 17 IS PELT fnAT Tul8 PenLM us SILVED mod Id: N 'WESfu sElste. RPS 'O' WAS TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL (
Wo#93004706 ) TKM System: 183 utt Sys: RPS Reactor Protection CE
/ -Q # D N# bd.
1 I
': G04AA Nucterr Plant R: Liability D:ts System Feiture arist Report -
Rtss D:ta 02/Z3/96, tmit 10 - clue, Utility Camponent ID, F:llure Discovery Det3 Jede Nisher 7247 ty _ Uni t _,, .,C omp., _ Utility Component Id_,, Detes Norratives 7PtSLS1 ISISSW PS 22 103 00: 10/28/94 Dese: WNILE TME PLANT uct naarrw- rom A REFUELING OUTAGE Am DURING TNE 10: 12/07/94 NORMAL 18 MsRAfl0M CNECKS OF PS 22103 ( PRESSURE SWITCN FOR i l Appt . TUROINE EERGENCY TRIP SIGNAL TO THE RPS (REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEN) 0:scs / CASINET 'C' ) IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT IT COULD NOT BE CALIBRATED TO THE
- O PROPER TOLERANCE . TNIS DEGRADED THE EMERGENCY TIABINE TRIP $!GNAL TO 4 Funct RPTUEFPR CNANNEL st' 0F THE RPS . TNERE ES No EFFECT ON THE PLANT . :
Desc: TROUBLESN00 TING CONFIRMD TNAT PS 22-103 COULD NOT BE CALIBRATED TO I RPS main turbine emergency trip fluid pressur ) TME PROPER SET P6 TNT ( IT TRIPPED BELOW THE REQUIRED 1000 PSI TRIP i
\
Kfra U069 Unit Electric Control Co SETPOINT ) . Mod nees J302 612 Cause: TNE CAUSE OF FA1L1Att OF PS 22-1031$ UNKNOWN , BUT PosStBLT DLE f l Mod id: TO AGIIIG . MY/*W Action: PS 22103 ES REPLACED WITH A NEW SWITCN , TESTED AND RETURNED To NORMAL , ( W0s94021154 ) ( Wo#94027258 ) ( PCM 391 188 ) TKM I I System: 180 Reactor Protecti C - Utt Sys: RPS f,M/^7/Qw M oq g, I FPLSLS1 !PVSUP PS1 01 00 09/16/93 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON TME LINE AT FULL POWER AND DURING TME ID: 09/30/93 PERFORMANCE OF TME MONTMLY SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE IT WAS D!$ COVERED Appt: TNAT POWER SUPPLY PS1 01 ( RPS (REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM) POWER RANGE )
! I Dssc: LINER POWER LEVEL CHANNEL ) WAS READING 12 . 8 VDC vs 15 VOC AS '
REQUIRED . THIS NAD NO IMMEDIATE EFFECT ON TME SYSTEM Am No EFFECT ON Ftries RPPnAGNM TME PLANT . -- Dates RPS power range neutron monitor channels Cause TROUOLESH00 TING REVEALED THAT POWER SUPPLY MAD FAILED LOW A10 <
- COULD WOT BE ADJUSTED TO THE PROPER VOLTAGE OUTPUT . CAUSE UNKNOWN , l 1 Kfr
- 7078 Technipower Div / Pencil Corp POS$1BLY DUE TO AGlNG .
, ::od Nue: MC14.5-1.0 4 tion: A NEW POWER SUPPLY ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) WAS INSTALLED , TESTED AND mod Id: RETURNED To NORMAL . ( Wo#93025189 ) TKM lystem: 180
- Reactor Protection CE /\/b"J" /$1 [ M h q [rg g / #20
- d<
i
./kse /ep.r pow .supp/p .
i ITDnW Mt A SCHEDULED REFUELING OUTAGE FPLSLS1 [PWSUP PS2 01 00: 10/30/94 Desc: WHILE T @ m ID: 12/07/94 CONTROL ROOM PERSONNEL REPORTED THAT TME 'O' CNANNEL LINEAR NUCLEAR : l Appl INSTRUMENTS WERE NOT DISPLAYING A VALID SUSCHANNEL DEVIATION ALARM ON i Dsse / THE 'D' CHANNEL 0F THE RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTDI ) , IT WAS g"7 ' LOCKED' IN ON THE 'D' CHANNEL OF THE RPS .WHEN IT SMGJLD NAVE BEEN CLEAR , A *15 VDC POWER SUPPLY ( PS2 01 ) IN THE CHANNEL 'O' POWR
)
Fme RPPWRGNM
- Dsses RPS power range neutron monitor channels RANGE LINEAR POW R LEVEL CHANNEL 8 CIRCUIT WAS FAILING LOW . TMis DEGRADED 1 0F 4 CHANNELS OF TME RPS . THERE WAS Wo EFFECT ON THE PLANT Kir T078 Technipower Div / Pencil Corp <
w Nun: MC14.5 2.0 gI C Jae TME CAUSE OF THE POWER SUPPLY FAILURE IS UNKNOWN , POSSISLY DUE r.od ld: TO AGING .
- Action
- A NEW POWER SUPPLY WAS INSTALLED . THE RPS WAS TESTED AND j Sptem: 180 Reactor Protection CE gD7 FYb RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( W0e94027226 ) TKM utt Sys: RPS g , , g4(y gyqq7mge , p g, g jge,, , [ ngf
) C *h> < < 5 l M'mj NfuUcc) o., M oo r_ e /6 M i d
)
i l i , 1 i j l
u RC04AA Nuclecr Plant Reliability DIts System Fattura Sriaf Report ~ ~ ~ am otte: 02/23/ % Sys Unit 10 v:Lue, Utility Component ID, failura Olscovery 0-ta .too Numer: 7267 , unit _ , Cony. _ Utility Component Id__ _ Dates Narratives FPLSLS1 ISIS $V TM/LOPR 07 00: 03/07/93 Dese: WNILE THE PLANT WA5 ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER THE CONTROL E004 10: 04/08/93 REPORTED THAT THE TENRAL M4Atlu LOW PRESSURE ( TM / Let 07 )
.ppl: BISTABLE ON CaAmuRL *9' of TuE SPS ( REACTom PROTECTION SYSTEM ) m8 Deses IN THE ftlPPte CORDITION . LOSS Of 10F 4 CNANNELS OF RPS . NO EFFECT
, ON PLANT .
Funct RPAPTMLP Cause TROUBLESHOOTING COULD NOT FINO A DIRECT CAUSE BUT WHILF Desc RPS high exist poiser/ thermal margin low pres / IROUBLESN00 TING $0g aanm84AL VOLTAGES RETURNED TO NORWL . IT 15 FELT TET TM ' WIPER
- AAN OF TIE '70+1 / 2' POT ( POTENTIr. tit ) ou TN TM_
Cfr: G295 Gulf Energy & Enviram sys.frige Retr / LWR D7 45L8 EDT IIRKlas 803 CONTACT SUT WHEN CYCLED IMt!NG Mod Nue: ELD 241 0000 TROUBLE $N00 TING 17 MADE GOOD CONTACT . CAUSE UNKNOWN , Possliilf DUE 10 Mod its [ 1i AGING . Action: TM / LOPR 07 AND THE RPS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED To NORMAL . ( System: 180 Reactor Protection C W0s93007601 ) TKM fe Utt Sys RPS l\/ hg)g MsbdWt ObflOVODM. FPLSLS1 IXMITR TT 1122M8 00: 04/20/93 Desc: WHILE THE PLANT WAS $NUTDOWN FOR A REFUELING OUTAGE AND DURING THE LD: 05/31/93 PERFORMANCE OF TME h0RMAL 18 M0iTT1rt00P CALIBRATIONS IT WAS DISCOVERED Appl THAT TT-1122MB ( TEMPERATURE TRANSMITTER FOR REACTOR COOLANT LOOP 18 Desc. NOT LEG ) ( REG GUIDE 1 . 97 TTPE A ) WAS CTCLING ERRATICALLT AND M~ COULD NOT BE Call 5 RATED .10F SEVERAL INPUT CHANNELS TO THE RPS ( Func: RPRCTE REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) CHANNEL WAS DECRADED NO D:sca RPS reactor coolant temperature channels cause: EFFECT ON THE PLANT BECAUSE OF PLANT STATUS . TROUSLESN00TlWG CONFIRMED THAT TT 1122MB COULD NOT BE PROPERLT CALIBRATED . CAUSE s:f ra R335 Rochester Instrunent Syss Inc UNKNOWN , POSSIBLT DUE TO AGING . Mod Nun: XSC 1372 Action: A NEW TRANSMITTER ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) WAS INSTALLED , TESTED AND Mod Id: TT 1122MS AND THE RPS WERE RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( wow 93011869 ) ftM I stem: Reactor Protectlon CE ((/7/k/ 7 g, gqggg 9 ,g,
- 0) }h fobim ,
- -. _ _ _ - = .- -. - -, ..
MucLCcr Plant R3 Liability Data System ' ' -
- e General Report 8 ors Terry C. Miller Reportald: WPSC00A4 Florida Power & Light Company Job uweer: 72 73 Rm Date: 02/23/96 Run Times 13:55
- ntroduction:
*h3 ettsched report was generated by your cpaery of the WPROS data base.
A suunpry of your gaery is listed below. QUERT rou sstected the following search condition (s): Selected System is testeF#Petterle@CE Find failure Discovery Dates that are after 01/01/93 Selected Unit 10 is ST. LUCIE 2 insre were 19 r'ecords meeting the search condition (s). ' 31$ PLAT AND SORT: fou sstected to run general report & Component Falture scief Report fou chose to sort the report by: Sort Sequence Field Name 1 Unit 10 . venue Z Utility Ccuponent 10 1 Failure Discovery Datedf gothic 9 type (letter gothic 09 medium) codepege t1dobese Df githic9
.- . = .
! . tp"RG04AA !uelccr Plant Astlebility D:ta System Felturo sclef Report - Rm D:ts: 02/23/96 Iy Unit ID . v:Lue, Utility Component 10, Failuro Discovery 0"t3 J e Number: 7273 yni t_ . Comp. ,,,,Utili ty Component Id_ _ Dates Narratives 8FLSLS1 INfCPM AW12 J2 00: 04/07/93 Desc: WHILE TME PLANT WAS ON TNE LINE AT FULL POWER AND DURING THE ID: 04/26/93 PERFORMANCE OF THE NONTMLY RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) Appt
, SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE IT WAS DISCOVERED TMAT THE ASGT ( ASYletETRIC 0:sc:
STEAM GENERATOR TRIP ) TRIP SETPo!NT WAS Ol'T OF TOLERANCE LOW AND COULD NOT BE PROPERLY CALIBRATED . LOSS OF 10F 4 CNANNELS OF RPS . NO Fmc: RPAPTMLP EFFECT ON PLANT . Desc: RPS high axial power /thernet mergin low pres / Cause TRGALESN00 TING REVEALED THAT A DIODE ( PIECE PART ) ON TME AW12 J2 MODULE OF THE RPS WAS BAD . CAUSE UNKNOWN , POSSisLY DUE 70 Mfr: 0142 Dever Inc AGING . Mod runs 19 501 2 Action: A NEW DIODE ( LIKI FOR LIKE ) WAS INSTALLED . AW12 J2 AND TNE Mod Its RPS WERE TESTED Am RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOf93010754 ) TEM stems Reactor Protection CE j mt # ) 8FLSLS2 IPWSUP 8fMPS*03 A w / DD: 11/19/95 Desc: WHILE TME PLANT WAS SMUTDOWNJOR A REFUELING OUTAGE AND DURING iM
~
ID: 01/10/9e PERFORMANCE OF THE NORMAL OUTAGE LOOP CAL 18A'Afl0N CHECKS IT WAS Appi DISCOVERED THAT STMPS*03 A ( s!$ TABLE (LOW FLOW) TRIP MATRIX PCER D3ect SUPPLY FOR CMANNEL 'As CF THE RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) WAS g: READING LOW AND THE LOOP COULD NOT BE CALIBRATED . TMis DEGRADED 1 07 Funct RPPSDI 4 CHANNELS OF RPS . THERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUBLESN00 TING DIse RPS channet power stsply and distribution sys CONFIRMED THAT STMPS 03 A WAS FAILING LOW AND COULD NOT BE ADJUSTED To l THE PROPER LEVEL . Efra A038 Acopian Cause: THE CAUSE OF POWER SUPPLY DEGRADATION IS UNKNOWN , POS$10LY DUE Rod hai: E15J1000 Mod Id: E15J [ TD AGING . 4: fME POWER SUPPLY WAS REPLACED . BfMPS 03 A AND THE RPS WERE TESTEDsAND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Wof95032690 ) ( Wof95018078 ) Ytx
..s stem IBD Sys: RPS Reactor Pro'ection-CE f (("" ,
gh ' FPLSLS2 IPWSUP BW15 PS1 00: 12/13/95 Desc: WHILEym m SMUTDOWN FOR A REFUELING OUTAGE AND DURING THE ID: 01/10/96 PERFORMANCE OF THE MONT M REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) Apgl: SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE IT WAS DISCOVERED TMAT BW15-PS1 ( POWER SUPPLY Dsse: [ FOR THE F2 CPC (CORE PROTECTION CALCULATOR)0F CHANNEL '88 0F TNE RPS ) Funes RPAPTMLP g- MAD A LOW OUTPUT AND COULD NOT BE PROPERLY ADJUSTED . TNIS DEGRADED 1 0F 4 CHANNLES OF THE RPS . THERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE PLANT . DIse: RPS high axial power /thermet mergin low pres / TROUSLESM00 TING CONFIRMED TMAT BW15 PS1 WAS FAILING LOW AND COULD NOT BE PROPERLY ADJUSTED . Mfr: 0142 - Devar inc Cause: THE CAUSE OF THE POWER SUPPLY FAILING LOW l$ UNKNOWN , POS$1SLT
' Nuni 19 601A gf DUE TO NORMAL AGING .
.od td: Action: A NEW POWER SUPPLY WAS INSTALLED . BW15 PS1 AND THE RPS WERE System: 180 Reactor Protection-CE
[ . TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Wor 95034929 ) TKM
\ r d /7 Mg utt Sys: RPS
/DM C
\ )
% J l
i I s
K5tG04AA t'uctser Plant R; Liability Dets System Fsilure Brief Report Run 0;ts: 02/23/06 Sys Unit 10 v tue, utllity Component ID, FCILuro Discovery Dats Joe Nueser: 7273 ,un i t_,, ,, Comp,, ,,, Utility Component Id _ _0ates Narratiwes
- PLSLS2 INTCPM CC1 02 00: 05/09/94 Dese WHILE TNE PLANT WAS ON TNE LINE AT FULL POER A CONTROL Rom ID: 09/08/95 OPERATOR REPORTED RECEIVING 'HIGH START UP RATE' TRIPS ON CNANNEL 'O' Appt: OF THE RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) . TM15 WAS A LOSS OF 10F 4 Disc CHANNELS OF 'MIGH START UP RATE' TRIP . THERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED THAT THE CC102 CARD ( RPS WIDE RANGE Funct RPIRNM MIGN START-UP RATE OF CHANGE OF POWER CIRCulf CIMPUTATIONAL IGULE )
Desc: RPS intermediate range /Nide range Log neutron MAD AN UNSTASLE ( ERRATIC ) OUTPUT AND WAS CAustNG SPIKES TNAT CAUSED THE 'HIGN START-UP RATE 8 TRIPS . Mfr: E146 Electro Mechanics Inc Cause: THE CAUSE OF CC1 D2 FAILURE IS UNKNOWN , POS$lBLY DUE TO AGING . Mod Cuu: 37238 Action: A NEW CC1 D2 CARD W.S INSTALLED . THE RPS WAS TESTED AND mod Id RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Waf94011409 ) TKM System: 150 UtL Syst RPS Reactor Protection CE h g kV " l S4H14 $ IU Wl(.E $N o 8 C /K 006'c4 7 / FPLSLS2 181SSW MIPOWER:AL -- 00: 08/11/94 Dese: WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER ANO DURING THE ID: 08/25/94 PERFORMANCE OF THE MCmTMLY LOGIC MATRIX TEST ON THE 'B' CNANNEL OF THE Appt: RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) IT WAS DISCOVERED TMAT THE BISTASLE Dese TRIP UNIT FOR THE MIPOWER TRIP ( MIPOWER 81 ) WAS DEFECTIVE AND WOULD MOT TRIP WHEN THE APPROPIATE INPUT SIGNAL TO TRIP WAS APPLIED . THIS Funca RPPWRGNM WAS A COMPLETE LOSS OF 1 0F 4 CNANNELS OF RPS THIS NAD NO EFFECT ON Discs RPS power range neutron monitor channels THE PLANT . TROUBLESM00 TING CONFIRMED THAT THE HIPOWER 81 TRIP UNIT WAS DEFECTIVE AND WOULD NOT TRIP AT THE PROPER INPUT $1GNAL . Mfr: E146 Electro Mechanics Inc g cause THE CAutt OF FAILURE IS UNKNOWN SUT IS POSSIBLY INE TO Aslas . Mod tun 34860 f\ Action: MIPOM 11 WAS REPLACED WITH A NEW ONE ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) . Mod Ida N! POWER B1 Aem THE RPS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Wo#94020269 ) TKM
'ystem 180 Reactor ProtectioryC
.t Sys: RPS
\
FPLSLS2 ISISSW MIPOWER C1
~% /
DUT UT758/93 Deses WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER THE CONTROL ROCM 10: 07/19/93 REPORTED THAT THEY WERE RECEIVING ' SPIKES' IN THE 'HIPOWER' SECTION OF Appts THE RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) THAT WERE ACTUATING WIPOWER Desc: TRIPS TNIS WAS A MOMENTARY LOSS OF 1 0F 4 CMANNELS OF RPS . C0ectil0M WAS DETECTED BY ANNUNCI ATOR ALARM , NO EFFECT ON PLANT . i Func: RPPWRCNM Cause TRCRJBLESNOOTING DID NOT REVEAL AN EXACT CAUSE OF THE SPIKING ( l Dese: RPS power range neutron nu11 tor channels ERRAfic ACTUAfl0N ) . NO TROUBLE WAS FOUND . ALL INPUTS AND CIRcJITS WERE GOOD AND FUNCTIONING PROPERLY . CAUSE UNKNOWN , POS$1BLY DUE 10 l Kfra E146 - Electro Meckonics Inc DIRTY COINTACTS . d gum: 34860 Action: CONNECTOR JACKS J8 , J9 AND J12 WERE CLEANED . SEVERAL INTERNAL Aod7d f kl SWITCHES WERE EXCERCISED TO INSURE THAT THEY WERE MAKING GCCD CONTACT
. THE RPS WAS TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOf93000711 ) TKM System: ISD Reactor Protection CE _ J utt Sys: RPS gyp .; 8,, ~ i
& M PFF x & p & a r c A /u.0 L J w 7(cw ,h TM N(o O /5 M M5 J
l
i
. I ;4PRG04AA Nuclear Ptont R3 liability D:ta System Feiture art:f Report '~ Am Date: 02/23/96 By: Unit ID
- v:Lue, Utility Component ID, F6(lur3 Discovery D,it3 Job Nummer 7273
, Unit _ ,,Come, _ Utility Component Id_ _ Dates Warratives .
! :PLSLS2 RELAY K1 j 00: 07/15/94 Dese: WNILE TME PLANT WAS SMUTDOWN TO REPA!R A FAILED TC8 ( TR!P CIRCUIT ID: 10/27/94 3REAKER ) AND WHILE TROUILESN00T!hG TCs 5 ( SEE TCS 5 00940714 ) IT ! Appli l
" / WAS DISCOVERED TMAT TME K1 RELAY ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM (RPS) l l Disc: ~~
l Funct RPMARXLG
. Y) MANUAL / AUTOMATIC REACTOR TRIP COMON LOGlc ) MAD A SET OF BURNED CONTACTS . TNis WAS CAUSED BY TCs 5 BECOMING MECMANICALLT 00UW AND l
CAUSING THE OPEN SET OF CONTACTS FOR K1 TO OVERMEAT Am suRN . THERE Desc: RPS manuel/ automatic reactor screa/ trip consno ARE FOUR K RELAYS . TWO IRJST OPEN FOR TME TCB'S TO OPEN . THE FAILURE OCCURED AFTER TME UNIT WAS SMUTDOWN SUT WOULD MAVE BEEN A LOSS OF 1 0F I Kft: G080 General Electric Company g fc 4 CHANNELS . Mod tum: 12WGV13A11A ) r,j Cause TME CAUSE OF FAILURE WAS DUE TO TC3 5 FAILING CLOSED AW CAUSING 1 mod id: 12NGV13 THE K1 RELAY CONTACTS 70 OVERNEAT . THE CAUSE OF TCS 5 FAILURE is DETAILED IN FPLSLS2 , TCS 5 , 00940714 AND LER 389 94 006 . System: IBD Reacto g tfctictufF Action: A NEW RELAY WAS INSTALLED , TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( y gg f' Oh V h ~ wW} Y ,
\
FPLSLS2 INTCPM LAF1 3 A1 00 04/13/94 Dese THE UNIT WAS SMUTDOWN FOR A REFUELING OUTAGE . !&C WAS CHECKING 10: 10/27/94 THE REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM LINEAR POWER SAFETY CHANNELS FOLLOWING Appt: / CORE RELOAD . TMESE CHANNELS ARE NOT IN SERVICE DURlWG REFUELING . Dsses ** THEY FOUND CHANNEL 'A' WAS READING 2% POWER AT 0% POWER CONDITIONS . Funct RPPWRCNN [) THE REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM POWER RANGE LINEAR POWER LEVEL CHANNEL ( LAS13 A1 ) CIRCUlf MAD FAILED WITN A HIGM OUTPUT . ALTMOUGH NE!THER , Osse RPS power range neutron monitor channets ' THE REACTOR PROTECTIVE SYSTEM ( RPS ) NOR THE LINEAR POWER RANGE
, NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTATION WERE IN SERVICE , THIS WOULD MAVE DEGRADED ONE
$;fr: E146 Electro Nechanics Inc -u 0F FOUR CHANNELS OF RPS . TMERE WAS NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT .
Kod Nun: 39510 Mod Id: f Cause: THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE OF LAS13 A1 15 UNKNOWN auf 15 POS$lBLY DUE TO AGING . Action: A NEW LAS1 3 A1 CARD WAS INSTALLED . THE RPS WAS TESTED AND trem: 180 Reactor Protection-CE RETURNED To NORMAL . ( Wos94008620 ) TKM
... Sys: RPS pgM [W Q./d CMA/Pd I 4 (MFF& -
ucwey AJ s 6 e.w < hen /) AL unk Awat l FPLSLS2 INTCPM LASI 3 C1 00: 12/16/93 Deses WHILE TME PL M .-L un ins LINE AT FULL POWER , CONTROL ROOM ID: 01/07/94 PERSONNEL REPORTED THAT THE VHPT ( VARI ABLE MIGH POWER TRIP ) W TIE Appt: 'C' CataEL OF TM 95 ( REACTOR PROTE".fl0N SYSTEM ) MAD TRIPPED . Desc: THIS IS A LOST 10F 4 CHANNELS OF RPS . NO EFFECT ON PLANT . Cause: TROUBLESM00T!NG REVEALED THAT THE 5A11 F C1 CARD ( RPS POWER Fme: RPPVRGNM RANGE LINEAR POWER LEVEL CMANNELS ) NAD TWO POTS ( POTENTIONOMETER ) ( Osse: RPS power range neutron monitor channels R39 & R40 ) ( PIECE PARTS ) M tEtf-WORN (In AND AW THE OUTPUTS y WERE MIGN . THE POTS WOut0 NO ' LONGER ADJUST . CMM SS AetM AIS Kfr: E146 Electro Mechanics Inc .j i M Nun: 39510 (f Action: TWO NEW POTS WERE INSTALLED IN THE LA51 3 C3 BOARD . THE RPS A l'd: CMANNEL 'C' , VMPT AND THE LAS1 3 C1 WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( W3e93033272 ) TKM i System: 180 Reactor Protection CE g g(C y- kg& NU DOE $ l l 4 l
l l aPRG04AA Nuctccr Plant Estlebility D*ts System Failuro Brisf Report - 'Em Dita: 02/2.3/9A j By: Unit 10 v:(ue, Utility Component ID, Failurs Discovery 0;ta Job Nummer: 7273 l l l ,un: t _ ,Como, _Utili ty Ccaponent Id_ _ Dates Narratives i
- PLSLS2 INTCPM LAS1 3 C1 D0: 06/14/95 Dese: WILE THE PLANT WAS ON TNE LINE AT FULL POWER A CONTROL ROOM l 10: 09/11/95 OPERATOR REPORTED RECEIVING SEVERAL 'HIGN POWER' TRIPS 131 TNE 'C' I Appl CMML OF TE WT ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) . TN!S WAS A Loss 08 Discs 1 0F 4 CNANNELS OF RPS . TMERE WAS Wo EFFECT ON THE PLANT .
. TROUBLESN00TlWO REVEALED TNAT THE LASI 3 C1 CARD ( RPS POWER RANGE Fmca RPPWRGNM LINEAR POWR LEVEL CNANNEL ) NAD AN ERRATIC OUTPUT ( FIEles ) .
Desc RPS power range neutron monitor channels Cause: THE CAUSE OF THE LASI 3 C1 CARD FAILURE is Uba0hal PUBSISLT WIE TO Aalus . Action: THE LASI 3-C1 CARD WAS REMOYED , TW BE m Int CLEBRED t;fr E146 Electro Mechanics Inc Mod itun 39510 { \ , TM CAAD WAS RflIISTALLED , THE RFS WAS TESTED Aa0 RETURNED TO NORMAL Mod Id . ( Wof95017192 ) Tot System: ISD Reactor Protection-CE ( Utt Sys: RPS f(, [C444 dC 8 -M.5~ d MW t ,iu FFLSLS2 1815SW LOSSLOAD A8 00: 12/27/95 Dese: WILE THE PLANT WAS SMUTDOWN FOR A REFUELING OUTAGE AND DURING THE 10: 01/10/96 PERFORMANCE OF THE MONTMLT RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) Appl SURVEILLANCE TEST IT WAS DISCOVER' l 0 THAT LOSSLOAD*A8 ( BISTA8LE (LOW Disc: , FLOW) TRIP UNIT FOR THE RPS CHANNEL ' A' ) DID NOT TRIP WEN THE PROPER SIGNAL TO TRIP WAS APPtlED . TMis DEGRADED T OF 4 CNANNELS OF RPS . Fme RPTUEFPR THERE WAS NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUBLESHOOTING CONFIRMED THAT Disc: RPS main turbine emergency trip fluid pressur LOSSLOAD-A8 WOULD NOT TRIP . Cause THE CAUSE OF BISTA8LE FAILURE is UNKNOWN , POSSIBLY DUE TO NORMAL Rfr: E146 Electro Mechanics Inc AGING , med Nun 34880 Action: A NEW BISTA8LE WAS INSTALLED . LOS$ LOAD A8 AND TME RPS WERE Mod Id: TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL , ( W0895035962 ) TKM
- stem: 180 -Reactor Protectiow CC FPLSLS2 ISISSW LOWFLOW A3 00: 06/04/95 Desc WILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER A CONTROL ROOM ID: 10/02/95 OPERATOR REPORTED THAT THE RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) WAS A:pt : EXPERIENCING TRIPS ON TNF. REACTOR COOLANT 'A' CARM LW FLI3d (
Discs LGNLERF-A3 ) BISTABLE . twt 3 tM A LOSS OF 10F 4 emamass e or RPS TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED THAT THE LOW FLW Bif7ABLE MAD FAILED LOW . , Fmes RPRCFL ,L Cause: THE CAUSE OF BISTABLE FAILURE IS UNKNOWN , POSSIBLY DUE TO AGlWG l Disc: RPS reactor coolant flow chamels j (/ Action: A NEW BISTABLE WAS INSTALLED , LOWFLOW A3 AND THE RPS WERE Mfr: E146 - Electro - Mechanics Inc TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOW 85016352 ) Tm ! N < } System: ISD Reactor Protection CE Utt Sys: RPS --- " ~~
, NPRG04AA tuctecr Plant R3 Liability Dets System F;iluro Orief Report - Rm Data 02/23/ %
< Sy Unit 10 vclue, Utility Component ID, Fcituro Discovery Det3 Joe Ikaner: 7273 yni t_ _Come, _ Utility Caponent Id _ _ Dates Narratives FPLSL12 IBISSW LPOEN-810 00: 04/23/94 Desc TIE tallT tRhs AT 295 PtnER RECOVERING FROM A REFWLING OUTAGE AND 10: 05/20/94 THE INSTRtAIENTATION AND CONTROL ( !&C ) MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT WAS Appts Dzscs A PERFORMING TME MONTMLY CALIBRATION PROCEDURE ON TNE RPS ( REACTOR j PROTECTION SYSTEM ) CMANNEL 'B' . CHANNEL 'D' WAS IN THE TRIP CONDITION DW TO AN UNRELATED FAILURE . EVEN TNOUGN CNANNEL 'B' WAS IN Funca RPAPTMLP BTPASS , IME lac STARTS TO CALitRATE 17 TWE REACitR TRIPPS . a 0:se: RPS high axial poiser/thernet margin tow pres / Cause: TRESLESN00TileG SY TNE ISC DEPT INDICATED TNAT TNE LOCAL POWER DENSITY BISTAaLE ( LPOEN 810 ) FOR CEAML 'B' WAS NOT ACTUALLY lu
- fr: E146 Electro Mechanics Inc BTPASS WITE TM EET lum AS IE TE STPASS 70 BITIS . AFTER Mod run 34880 EXTENSIVE INVESIGATION TIE SYSTEM SUPERVISOR STATED TNAT 170E3-B10 RRA Mod Id: BEEN n!Wim FalBI TM SESINSES OF (PERATION . THE CAueE IS IEITIAL INSTALLATIM EMER .
)
System: 180 Reactor Protection CE Action: ALL OTNER BTPASS CIRCUITS WERE CHECKED AND ONE OTNER WAS FmJND Utl Syst RPS TO NAVE THE SAM PROBLEM . THE WIRING ERROR WAS CORRECTED . LPOEN 810 p . i AND THE RPS WERE TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( W0s94009792 ) ( INE-
/d .
94 028 ) ( LER 389 94003 ) TKM I( 10hY\ 1. $ 0 0 $v ht {nad TY 'Y ' f FPLSLS2 ISODIV
- M DD 02/26/95 Dese: WWILE THE PLANT WAS ON TME LINE AT NEAR FULL POWER CONTROL ROOM ID: 05/16/95 PERSONNEL REPORTED RECEIVING SEVERAL ALARMS ON THE 'C' C3ANNEL OF THE Appt: RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM ) . THIS WAS A LOSS OF 1 0F 4 CHANNELS Dise OF THE RPS . TMERE WAS NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . TROUBLESN00 TING REVEALED TNAT A SIGNAL ISOLATION BOARD ( OS1*C1 ) ( P0lER RANGE LINEAR Func: RPPWRGNM POWER LEVEL CHANNEL ) 1840 FAILED AND ALLOWED THE WIDE RANGE POWER Dsse RPS power range neutron monitor channets RANCE SIGNAL TO THE RPS 70 GO TO GROUND , WHICH CAUSED THE ALARMS AND TOOK THE 8C' CHANNEL QUT OF SERylCE .
Mfr: E146 Electro Nechanics Inc ] g causes TNE CAWEE OF TME FAILUBE FOR OB1 C1 IS UNKNOWN BUT l$ POSSIBLY tod Nun: 37242 od Ida g [y DUE 70 NORMAL ACTNG OR Ele OF NORMAL LIFE .
\ Action A NEW 081 C1 00ARD WAS INSTALLED . THE 'C' CHANNEL OF THE RPS System: ISD Reactor Protection CE O NIk
~ Sv , .~ nwPg, . , an .
,n W4 w fik h M U. MUI V i M -5 s
t kM Mdhb
< s - sV{ -
g ) FPLSLS2 18tSSV VS 22 95A DD: 01/05/95- Desc WWILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER AND WHILE PERFORMING 10: 03/25/95 AN OPERATIONS ' Loss OF LOAD' TEST IT WAS REPORTED THAT PS 22 95A ( Appl TURBINE EMRGENCY TRIP $!GNAL TO THE RPS (REACTOR PROTECT!0N SYSTEM) ) Dese: WAS 700 SLOW To RESPOND TO TRIP SIGNAL . THIS DEGRADED 10F 4 TURBINE TRIP CHANNELS TO THE RPS . THERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE PLANT . Func RPTUEFPR TROUSLESN00 TING REVEALED THAT PS-22 95A WAS 'STICt]NG' AND CalLD NOT Dese: RPS main turbine emergency trip fluid pressur IE SATISFACTORLY CALIBRATED . Cause THE CAUSE OF PS 22-95A STICrING 15 UNKNOWN , 6)lE TO E8rt UO69 Unit Electric control to NtWIRL A38M ( SW.W SEN, LIFE ) . Mod Num: J302/612 Action: P H D-95stals M , TESTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( Mod id: Wow 95000541 ) TKM System: IBD -Reacto h lan CE Utl Sys: RPS .f, ' Th(; Yh 4 WW k'lW I ]
. -. -- . _ . - _ _ ~ ~ . -. . .- - .-- .- .
i
,4PRG04AA Nuctstr Plant Rstlability D:ta System
- Failuro Brief Report ~~
Run Dits: 02/23/96 Sys Unit 10 v:Lue, Utility Conssonent 10, 7:ituro Discovery Dit3 Jets unatier: 7273
, Unit.,, . Comp. Utility Component Id,_,,, _ Dates Narratives ,
srLSLS2 IPwSUP PS1 BW10 00: 04/17/93 Deses WILE TME PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER Am DURING THE ID: 06/21/93 PERFORMANCE OF THE MONTMLY SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE ON TME RPS ( REACTOR gpt s , PROTECT 10N SYSTEM ) IT WAS DISCOVERED TMT WNEN TNE BY PASS KETS ARE Dise REMOVED AT THE COMPLET!0N OF THE PROCEDURE THE 'NI POWA' BISTA8tE l
. TRIP NmlWLE TRIPS . TNIS RESULTED IN A LDES OF 10F A CRWELS OF RPS l Func: RPPSDI BUT MD No EFFECT ON THE PLANT . I Desc: RPS chamel power staply and distribution sys cause: Tarsma samnnTING REVEALED TNAT TM PERER asuPtf ( Psi-gW10 ) Fe TM NI-PtRER TRIP lAlli MS FAILED LOW CAuslNE TNE Ni PEREE TRIP WIT ,
Nfra A038 Acopian TO TalP . CAUSE == , POSSISLY SW 19 Atlas . Mod Nuss P8183
] Action: A NEW PCRER SWPLY ( LIKE FOR LIKE ) WAS INSTALLED AND TESTED .
s l Mod Id: 15J PS1 OW10 Am TNE RPS WERE RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WDf95011557 ) Tot System 180 r Reactor Protection CE Utl Sys RPS 7 j gr / ' l
) ,
l FPLSLS2 IPWSUP PS4 02
\ /
00: 05/09/94 ,,0ese: WHILE TME PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER A CONTROL ROOM ID: 09/08/9F OPERATOR REPORTED RECE!VING 'N!GN START UP RATE TRIPS' W CNANNEL 'D' Apple N OF TNE APS ( REACTER PROTECTItal SYSTEM ) . TRIS MS A LM W 10F 4 Desc: CNANNELS OF 'NIN START-W RATE TRIPS' . TROUBLESN00 TING REWALED TMT POWER SUPPLT P94 02 ( RPS WIDE RANE NIGN RATE OF CAME OP POWER Func: RPlRNM CIRCUlf PONER SUPPLY ) MD LOW CUTPUT ( 734 VDC V810Must ) Am WAS Discs RPS intermediate range / wide range log neutron CONTRIBUTING TO THE SPIKING AND TRIPS OF THE 'HIGH START UP RATE TRIPS' . Kfr: B222 Bertan Associates Inc Cause: THE CAUSE OF THE PS4 D2 FAILURE 15 UNKNOWN BUT POS$1BLY OLE 570 Mod tum: 1623A .MISB . Mod Id v Action: A NEW POWER SUPPLY WAS INSTALLED . PS4 D2 A m THE RPS WERE TFSTED AND RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( WOW 94011409 ) TKM s Reactor Protection CE f
& Mff + J nX <sa., MJ w%; %
i J *
/
FPLSLS2 IPWSUP PS5 82 00: 02/21/95 Deses WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT APPROXINATELY 501 POWER Am 10: 03/25/95 DURlWG TNE PERFORMANCE OF THE MONTMLY RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM Apple
) FUNCTIONAL SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURE IT WAS DISCOVERED T MT PS5 82 (
Dise: RPS WIDE RANGE NIGN RATE OF CHANGE OF POWER POWER SUPPLY ) WAS mff 0F TOLERANCE LOW AS CTAJLD NOT BE PROPERLY ADJUSTED . TMERE WAS NO EFFECT Fme: RPIRNM ON THE SYSTEM SINCE THE POWER SUPPLY FAILURE WOULD NOT EVE PREVENTED Dise: RPS interinediate range / wide range tog neutron A SIGNAL FRO WT1rT7 PING TNE REACTOR . THERE WAS No EFFECT ON THE PLANT
. TROUSLESM00TlWG CONFIRMED THAT PS5 82 COULD NOT BE PROPERLY ADJUSTED Kfr: T078 Technipower Div / Penril Corp .
- Kun: TDP 15.0 0125A Cause: THE CAUSE OF POWER SUPPLY FAILURE !$ UNKNOWN , POSSISLY DUE TO ad Id: / E @ OF NORMAL LIFE .
Action: A NEW POWER SUPPLY WAS INSTALLED . PS5 82 A@ TME RPS WERE System: IBO Reactor Protection-CE TESTED AW RETURNED TO NORMAL . ( W0e95005347 ) TKM utt Sys: RPS "3 O-T , f's _
} g w j -
v
l ypg(,04AA f uclist Plant Rstiability Dets System - Fsilure trief Report ~~Rm 0:tes '02/13/% j sy Unit ID s stue, Utility Ccaponent 10, f ailura Discovery Dets Job maemer: 7273
,Jni t _ ,, Comp. Utility component Id_ _0stes Narratives
'PLSLS2 INTCPM PT 11028 00: 10/04/95 Desc WHILE THE PLANT WAS ON THE LINE AT FULL POWER A CONTROL RO ID: 10/26/95 pt: OPERATOR REPORTED RECIEVING A PRESSURIZER PRESSURE TRIP ON THE
'B' D:sca
- 0F TME RPS ( REACTOR PROTECTION STCTEM ) . TNIS 148 A LOSS OF 10F 4 CNANELS OF TM RPS . THERE WAS NO EFFECT ON THE PLANT . A VISU Fmc: RPPZPR INSPECTION REVEALED TNAT PT 11023 ( PRES $Lat CONVERTER PCs PRES PRESStat ) IMS Ilpt0PERLY INSTALLED ( (PEN CIRCUIT ) Am NOT MAKING Desc RPS pressuriter pressure channets EEb CtNTACT . TNIS WAS CAUSING THE PRESSURIZER PRESSLRE TRIP ON TNE w$ . -
Kir 7180 Foxboro to Caucer THE CAME OF lirAOPER INSTALATItal IS UNKNOWN , MastgLY BM TO Mod Mun: 2Al 12V l PREvlous IIRINTEmanct . mod its 2Al t2V ) Actions TM MODULE WAS RESEATED , TESTED ANO RETURNED TO MolNEL . M i System ISO PT 07 28 ( PRES $Utf CONVERTER FOR CONTAINMENT PRESSURE ) WAS ALSO Reactor Protection CE RESEATED . ( Wof95027980 ) TKM i
~
~
; 14/ /
Nr aud.
~
t I l
t 4 1.0. INTRODUCTION impiementation of the NRC Maintenance Rule in accordance with NUMARC 93-01
" Industry Guideline for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants," requires events having an impact on systems within scope be evaluated to determine if they are Maintenance Preventable Functional Failures (MPFFs). The following methodology provides guidance to be used when making MPFF decisions.
Figure 1 is provided to assist in MPFF determinations. The intent is that the MPFF decision making process use the basic causes found on Figure 1 to determine is a Functional Failure is maintenance preventable. Figure 1 was developed to be consistent with the Event Casual Factor Categories found in Appendix A of INPO Good Practice OE-907, " Root Cause Analysis." 2.0 MPFF Determination Guidelines i FUNCTIONAL FAILURES A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that a SSC within the scope of the rule is not capable of performing its intended function. 1 Intended function is defined as ..the function (s) performed by the SSC,as listed in the MR, that required its inclusion within the scope of the rule. For SSC's that have Plant Level Performance Cntena such as SCRAMS, the intended function is to not cause a SCRAM. Failure that results in an event covered under a Plant Level, such as Unplanned Safety System Actuation, would be a functional failure. Loss of function can be either direct, i.e., the SSC that performs the function fails to perform rts intended function or indirect, i.e., the SSC fails to perform its intended function as a resuit of another SSC (safety related or non safety related). If a functional failure recurs during post maintenance testing but before retuming the SSC's to
- service, it could be indicative of unacceptable corrective actions but is not considered another functional failure.
Intended function is further defined as a demand function or run function. A consaus decision to make a funcDon unavailable is not normally a functional failure. Failure to meet a Tecnnical Speist,on is not automatically a loss of function. An evaluation of the event may find that system design enterion was met even though the TS acceptance enteria was not.
t , l 3-4 1 Failure during a test must be evaluated to detemnine if the same would have occuned dunng a
- true, demand or in absence of the test conditions. If so, the failure is a functional failure.
Failure of a redundant component is considered a funcbonal failure if the componentis 1 of 2, l or requires 2 of 3 coincidence. , MAINTENANCE PREVENTABLE 4 i i.,
- A MPFF is an unintended event or condition such that s SSC within the scope of the rule is not l capable of performing its intended function and should have been orevented by the performance of maintenance actions by the utility. -
l The cause of the failure is attnbuted to a maintenance-related activity. } Maintenance includes not only those activities traditionally associated with identifying and j correcting actual or potentially degraded conditions, i.e., repair, surveillance, diagnostic i examinations, and preventive measures, but extends to all supporting functions for the conduct i i of these activEe5. l 1 1 1 1 Examoles of Wintengnce Preventapig; ! -Implementation of incorrect maintenance procedures, j i Incorrect implementation of correct maintenance procedures. j -Incorrect implementation of maintenance performed without procedures considered within the j skill of the craft.
- -Failures as previously documented by Operating Experience that could have been precluded
{ by an appropnate and timely maintenance activity.
-Failure to perform maintenance activities that are normal and appropriate to the equpment l
function and importance, i { Examples ' hat are not Maintenance Preventable: A i ' -initial failures due to OEM design and manufacturing including initial electronic piece part earty failures. l -Initial failures due to design inadequacies in selecting or applying commercal or "off the shelf' l designed equipment. ! -Initial failures due to inherent material defects, i -Operational errors and extemal or initiating events.
-Intentional run to failure. !
Corrective maintenance based on the Pass / Fail of a survedlance test is not considered a MPFF unless the equipment could not have performed its function, e.g., check valve leak rate
test. Although the component has exceeded a defined condition, maintenance is only performed once that condition is exceeded. Components bemg out of specification (e.g. breaker trip times) is not considered a MPFF unlets the equipment could not~have performed its funcbon Packing leakage is not a MPFF unless the equipment could not perform its function. Moor leaks will be considered MPFF's if the valve function is to prevent radiological releases. Functional failure of a component that can be demonstrated to be a first time event (plant and industry) and the plant had no reasonable way of expecting an occurrence (vendor manual or related experience), will not be tallied as an MPFF against a Performance Critenon. However, it will be tallied as part of the repeat MPFF count. Refer to Figure 1. MPFF Program Areas and Basic Causes, for the determination of Maintenance Preventable based on functional failure basic cause. am
. ._ _ . . _ _ _ _ .-.._.- _.m.. . .. _ . - _ . _ - - ~ ..._.------..-..m_-...-._. -_.-.-_.-._.m . - _ _ . . . - . - - .
~ ,
i 1 l FIGURE 1 ; 1 MPFF PROGRAM AREAS AND BASIC CAUSES a.- = w " Ms.amm em ' e, a --e vw , , opes.nen
==== su e
c_- - _ - e esa r_- _ _ one teJ p; -_ _ 80 -* soa r) .
,- - ris ew >: .- >: -w- ,- >1 , w ,,,
r=em mamw r -ama m m.=*=vw== .es, e=mv ** t=-a =- on-mem,w
*e=**='=r *=* eaae . _
pue . Eh.ete e*o==*w ,====.==o===. , e== op-=.e > a====. seio m ese-_ ,: .- 8"5 a -=== o.msa - w== mm , , , , , , , 1_ - - - -
== eae some , e -a
**=u-s m ma=* F*n
,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,ue
, uma M* m -
*""'=',
==.=.=.,e
. .=.==.*ea1.
',,,,,,,,, , e r . - ==
7- ' -O. - ,
.,,,. ,,, ,,c,
,- oo. . - --- - _ DCl , e.use to !
, wiese ,== i .- . .p
, m% ~ -'
er [ af Dem PeAp.ed M , ebd fema remme en Ph'as , m_.==s ope,sm,e,w m,es,s emannsom .
,- m-sw o.a.eom. _ _ _
. _ _ -_..= = = . = = = =
, io v o=== eart u-m sure ,
- emame.w a===a.ma. ***m== -
, : : sm. , u .
h.ammsey h M EDruS89 ef essasey gg3 , riam me ene e.4, sme. ,
-.m
*- y,y
- . -. i sea a==== = mar t
tearw. P. masse M---^ - tel osummmes S.ste Wrest emmead. -^
== ow-=== sma soJ I, 'e - ~-
- _ _ . _ _ . . _ . _ . _ . i o===e **Cl , _ . _ _ . . _ ,
, e , _ . . _ _ . . _ _ .
me ===== m Maintenance Causes that are Not m Maal=, , r-- - - - - Related Causes Maintenance Related ! o-====s=> # t M l
* -. , t r=== * - - ' '
*a=* m (sempas codes) Proorem A, es . asesc t' -- 6 I
ii
* ' " * * * .. - - = . . . ,
t i t f
~
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR ' SSC: Status:(a)( ) Updated: Performance Monitorina Period: , l Performance Criteria: Unavailability. Reliability-PLPC 1 i i
- UNAVAILABILITY-1 1
4 t 4 J i 1 i RELIABILITY-4 4 i l PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-
~
i Trends: Recent apolicable Industry information:
,. REVIDRAET 2 PlOCEDU4MRLEMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65 PAGE:
THE MAINTENANCE RULE 30 of 36 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
"" dbD"N.IB ST. LUCLE PLANT
, FIGURE 4 (Page 1 of 2)
Goal Setting and Monitoring Unit: 1 2 Date: Risk Significant: 0 Yes 0 No SSC: Reason for Goal Setting: Performance Criteria Not Met Which criteria were not met? Description of Events: Repetitive MPFF (attach Figure 3 for each failure) Explain how failures are repetitive. l l Were previous corrective actions inadequate? ; l i References (attach): Does this SSC require (a)(1) status? O Yes 0 No System Owner l Yes - signature of Expert Panel Member l Maintenance Rule Coordinator i ! No - signature and reason why not _ j j Expert Panel Chairman l l
. _ _ . _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ - -.._ y -
- 1 REvlDRAET 2 PRoCEDUNMENTATION OF 10 CFR 50.65, PAGE d THE MAINTENANCE RULE 31 of 36 l ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE i
" " E N .i 2 ST. LUCIE PLANT l
l FIGURE 4 (Page 2 of 2) Goal Setting and Monitoring (continued) Root Cause Analysis: Assigned to: Corrective Actions and Responsibilities: Assigned to:
- 1. !
+
2. 3. ! 4. Goal Setting and Monitoring: For each corrective action, there should be a goal ' to be attained that shows the action was correct, monitoring for a follow-up period to verify success, and a discussion to show how PSA and industrywide I operating experience were used in the process. Goal Monitoring' method & frequency Date PSA/ Industry Exp
- 1. 1.
- 2. 2.
'- 3. 3.
i 4. 4. l [
- Prepared by:
System Owner Date i Review and Concurrence: Maintenance Rule Coordinator Date i Review and Approved: Expert Panel Chairman Date
c. VMAlnemVersion:0 Corrective Action Form PMAI Site:ESL Source Number: PM96-03491 Document: STAR 950801 Originat .SCE, Due Date: 4/2W96 Assigned Deptartment: Q3I OST/KORTH Q implementor Name Unit Outage Mode SNO NCR OWA
Description:
THE MAINT RUl.E REQUIRES RIST ASSESSMENT WHEN REMOVING EQUIP FORM SERVICE FOR PREVENTIVE MAINT. AND MONITORING ACTIVITES. I NEED DOCUMENTATION TO SHOW HOW THIS IS DONE IN SHUTDOWN AND NON-OPERATING MODE. OST PROCEDURE SHUTDOWN SAFETY ASSESSMENT. l Acceptance Section l Status / Comments: I understand and accept responsibility of the above listed action and due date . b Department Manager Signh l Due Date t-xtension/ Transfer Hesponsibility Reques'.s j Extend To Date Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Onginator/Date Manager /Date extena io vate Mequest Dy Ivate supervisor /vate vnginator/vate manager /vate l Reasons Appvd By xeta Resp.To Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Manager /Date accipent/Date Reasons: (Completion Sectionl Completion Date: 2- 8 78 Close-Out Documents: MM 17,o f Comments: S hrA cua h/hry As r c ir.M 7 6 e us e , w . Ah /7v/ , i l Completed By: M i Date: T'7-f# p Reviewed By: . / Date: l Approved By: / Date: ' / Reviewed By: Date: Wo Q a & ph caos W a DpgMy
l Qw , -. -ag,a4t_.,f' ST.LUCIE ACTION REPORT l l
- 1 i
1
-+ IDENTIFICATIONSECTION Date 7 / AS/ f r STAR # WO l
/$,1 ,, Ano ., d h '
Person /Degbertment inillotina [s//sMr < &,'oldq INITIAL Q.C. FjE\ Cpm 7/24/ 1 \ ~ - - DeScript. ion O\ -n, mn!,, % u, A(n rien m <,:vk o n unu.id- OLA u,g, go n h re m m,% afnr Am nruin ' Au- nii,n n ,% N mn , Weit am,, g,,,,, E n >,1 n.En> % n % or. H u: H n . I i.> , d dn eo m, n & Won r-
\ .ehnr3 kna shd tr don > in r h ri h/ce,) n n /l nns -e ns i:a r'r ho '
c/ IM M j \g m ods ! N, l.acadon l k 0; E' (le, NRC Correspondencs #, Audit Report, Operatorworkaround Yes QNo lQ Morences Drawing #, personnel observation, etc.) 5 //) Mt An.L $ /s Y3)
\ 'O i g
q 30G l Ac6ons
%) <
917 l
' O'#
- 1. Were any steps taken to mitigate? Yes No l 2. What were they and were they m reautul? 71i% 4 /lnni in tr70)e l lu [Ils Al??/}') nnvidrixi_
br# PLA r:t ut nnnfitdla ' in stArr om ds_r . J ' D 3. Suspeded cause of condition dknown. , s
- 4. Recommendation to correct and department responsible. /WS .tiar/db wdrenr unz, le o ecM/b e6 <'s . ,
- & A k VI, Jrns iln a. Mo-vnuuJ- /;t act) ne, ecid, +- u C// An e vl A f l ne,,h du nlioi ), d si esih fu okt ,i, di r e's , en - m bs h
'H. ,N ,%
' U
,, ! , LJ Department Head Signatur= > e Dets 7 / Ail M._ Do you require approval to close? @ Yes U No I 1
d REVIEW / APPROVAL l ;
.v a r / 473/A % rv
- 1. Assigned Department. 5t, - P W- '
7 OPS ANilC Operabdity Assessment Required: JPN
- 2. Reviews STA ISI IHE Technical Subconmttee Revw Required ]
3.NPh00 C HPES
- 4. Evaluation due by /dI / / 9 EExtended to: 1 / Initials.
- 5. Corrective measures completed by 2 I / / % . Extended to: / / Irdtlais:
4 5 I
- n. 1 2 3 3/1750
! 6. Is item a modo hok Yes b ] ] [ Comments: O'- ' l % ' ~ " "' T <D D' A '*' ' #
- d. . ,
i'A '"
,/.- r .; W N
, ,... . . ,n . . < , : .i . w 7 . .
Signature [M 8 ate D 7 / /7/9P Do you require approval to &se? @es No
- 1. Notifications. (i.e., AP 0010721,'NRC Required Non Routine Notircations & Reports' Yes C No l
AP 0005782. ' Plant Gunde to Reporting Environrnentsj Non-Compilances and Significant Events' h SP 0006125.
- Reporting of Safeguards Events")
- 2. Event Type 19 Signature Date
- 3. Securtty event C Yes O No O FOP Bev.1 - 495)
(Ql-16-28. WPG)
a A.^-- , ;r-; 'r= of a non conformino hem no h queadon and opaedon is required. DOCN B. Engheartne suksence b requireo or reemronon of design. m *
- c. Engneenne seentence needed for scot cause determnedon. COMP D. For eefety reistsWguety rWesed hoggs, past operebNry of hem is queadonable (as found conc 9 tion). ITM E. EQ evaluation ns tw LJ F. 10CFR21 leeue I Technical O G. 50.58 issus O H. ASMEXileeue if any block (A through H)le checked, enewer the foGowing Resolution required. Dane / / Mode ConiSilonelreisese to use es le QYes No (supponMg documentadon required)
Dispoeidoned by vatned by IrwendoadonR* Causamenoric impacVHow to ProverWSeaponse l Responelble Person ._, 2 m h E n. m o a w g Comsedw Adlons Assigned to FW Dem Outeos vehicle used Compieesd Required (PCM, WO number) Date gn SNO REF A 1. u n w'r %t p um cot TW' ,,,,_,J__,j_,,,,,,, Q Q # Ze_j_,f__j( 3 c t- A-re m u.te
- 2. ~bIPoem .a * :2d" ct.7tr f 22. N 54W6 w+ %for
,,,_J J _
] <sret. . iJN % %
&t c KM esLT""
3.
,,_f__f_ Q Q , / /
4.
,,_J ,,,,,f _,,,,
C _ / /
-1 CLOSEOUTSEC110N I
- 1. AI correctNo edians complete (note exceptions bokm) I d I Assigned Departmont
- 2. Initiating Department Concurrence !' / _T I!f4 initiating Department
- 3. ANil Review VflA /
- 4. ISI Review M/A / _
- 5. OC Concunence > #/8 I QC
- 8. Plant General Manecer Approval (conocovo accons satisfactory and exceptions agreed to) Synarfire
/IIII%
' Plant General Manecer Date Exceptions:
(OI.16 2C.WPG) W
~
1 The Maintenance Rule 6 50.65. Requirements for moniuring the effectiveness of maintenance nt nuclear power plants (a)(1) Each holder of an operiting license under 56 50.21(b) or 50.22 shall monitor the performance or condition of s auctures, systems, or components, against licensee-established goals, in a manner mM1+nt te provide mamnable assurance that such structures, systems, and components, as defined in paragrapb (b), are capable of fulfilling their intended functions. Such goals shall be established commensurce with safety and, where practical, take into account mdustrywide operating experience. When the performance or condition of a structure, system, or component does not meet established goals, appropriate corrective action shall be taken. (2) Monitoring as specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section is not requimd where it has been demonstrated that the performance or condition of a structure, system, or component is effectively being controlled through the performance of appropriate preventive maintenance, such that the structure, system, or component remains capable of performing its intended function. (3) Performance and condition monitoring _ activities and associated oals aJn p;rge ~ e maintenance activities shall be enplted1T1 Cast 1iiihtfalfftfahrrg'ihto ac t,whe pra dh30strywTdW6pErstiii[experiefice. Adjustments shall be made where necessary to e.nsure that the objective of preventing failures of structures, systems, and components through maintenance is appropriately balanced against the objective of minimizing unavailability of structures, systems, and components due to monitoring or preventive maintenance. In performing monitoring and preventive maintenance activities, an assessment of the total plant equipment that is out of service should be taken into account to determine the overall effect on performance of safety functions. (b) The scope of the momtonng program specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall include safety-related and nonsafety related structures, systems, and components, as follows: (1) Safety-related structures, systems, and components that are relied upon to remain , functional during and following design basis events to ensure the integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, the capability to shut down the reactor and maintain it in a safe shutdown condition, and the capability to prevent or mitigate the consequences of accidents that could result in potential offsite exposure comparable to the 10 CFR part 100 guidelines. (2) Nonsafety related structures, systems, and components: , (i) That are relied upon to mitigate accidents or transients or are used in plant emergency ! operating procedures (EOPs); or j (ii) Whose failure could prevent safety-related structures, systems, and components from j fulfilling their safety-related function; or l (iii) Whose failure could cause a reactor scram or actuation of a safety-related system. (c) The requirements of this section shall be implemented by each licensee no later than July 10,1996. 1 Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of June,1991. ! Signed, Samuel J. Chilk, Secretary or the Commission
- Later changed to once per refueling cycle but less than 24 months. i i
I
Evaluation of STAR 950801 This STAR was generated to address the 10 CFR 50.65 requirements for the Maintenance Rule. - For the requiiement that "In performing monitoring and preventative maintenance activities, an assessment of the total plant equipment that is out of service should be taken into account to determine the overall effect on performance of safety functions", the Shutdown Safety l Assessment (SSA) will provide this assessment while the unit is shutdown. (It is.done at l power via the Critical Maintenance Management program.) The SSA has been informally done for the past few outages by the STA. It has not been procedurahzed and needs to be evaluated for adequacy and its results validated for each specific plant configuration. The development of the SSA bases, validation and formal inclusion in a FRG approved procedure will be completed by March 1,1996, prior to the Unit 1 refueling outage. As far as the Maintenance Rule requirement that " Adjustments shall be made where l necessary to ensure the objective of preventing failures of structures, systems and components through maintenance is appropriately balanced against the objective of l mimmizing unavailability of structures, systems and components due to monitoring or preventative maintenance", the SSA will not accomplish it. This would require comparing the reduction in mean time between failures and time to repair given increased maintenance with the unavailability time of the equipment during the maintenance to see if value is added by doing the maintenance. This study is well beyond the scope of the SSA. tol4/fs' t f
~.
S_ OPS '~ E enoceouns RMM NMR & WM DOCN ADM-17.01 SYS cOue counteTeo ITM. 13 ST. LUCIE PLANT ._ __ _ _. . l l . f-- PREVIOUSLYISSUED AS 0005725 " L' _ >Q ADM-17.01 REVISION
~
13
, m r m%
m m e m
^
! F
-R ,5, = = -
Il r F __ l
--U ~ U > U U U U \ U U--
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE SHIFTTECHNICAL ADVISOR ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE REVISION REVIEWED BY APPROVED BY DATE FRG ON 0 11/12/91 G. J. Boissy 1/7/92 Plant General Manager 13 01/22/96 J. Scarola 01/22/96 Plant General Manager Responsible Department. ADMINISTRATIVE gMG 03,04,96
.- ~ _ .- ._ -.- . ._- - . . . . . - - _ - _ . . - . -
l REVISION No.: PROCEDURE TTTLE. PAGE: l 13 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES PRocEouRE no OF THE SHIFT TECHNICAL ADVISOR 10 of 28 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE l ADM-17.01 ST. LUCIE PLANT 1 7.'O INSTRUCTIONS: (continued) 7.7 Shutdown Safety Assessment (SSA)
- 1. While either unit is in a shutdown mode of operation, the STA .
should complete a Shutdown Safety Assessment each shift or as l conditions change. The SSA provides a real-time assessment of the unit's ability to prevent or mitigate an event as systems are removed from service for maintenance or repair. l
- 2. The resuits of the SSA should be communicated to plant personnel (Outage Management, Operations, Maintenance and Construction personnel) such that appropriate precautions or contingency actions can be put into effect, as necessary.
- 3. Appendix 5 provides guidance on the performance of the SSA.
l I P l l l i
/R13 4
REVISION NO.: PROCEDURE TITLE: PAGE: 13 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES f PROCEDURE NO.: OF THE SHIFT TECHNICAL ADVISOR 28 of 28 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ADM-17,01 ST. LUCIE PLANT APPENDIX 5 SHUTDOWN SAFETY ASSESSMENT R vel - W. TEMP FPRES DATE/ TIME V A-SAFETY FUNCTION CONDITION REACTIVITY CONTROL 1? Boron Conc > TS SDM requirements / Refueling Conc =3/N Green 10 - 12 2J Boration Flowpath Available =3/N Yellow 8-9 3 i Second Independent Boration Flowpath =2/N Orange 6-7 4j Likelihood of Dilution Event: RCS temperature < 200*F Y=1/N Red 05 TOTAL M 1 Prirnary Water to CHG PP Suction Tagged Shut Y=1/N 1 Boronometer or dilution alarm available Y=1/N ' Ca Level > 36' in Mode 6 Ys1/N
- 5) Re or defueled .Y=10/N)
ELECTRICAL POWER AVAILABILITY 11 1 Train S/U XFMR,4KV Vital Bus, Diesel & SR DC Bus =S/N Green 10 12 2h Second S/U XFMR,4KV Bus & SR DC Bus Avail =2/N Yellow 89 31 Second Diesel,4KV Bus & SR DC Bus Avail =2/N Orange 6-7 41 SBO X-tie available 5? RCS level > 33 ft or No switchyard work or Defueled
=1/N Red 05 TOTAL M
=2/N RCS INVENTORY CONTROL 1 RCS Makeup Tank / Pump Available =5/N Green 10 12 2 Second independent Makeup Tank / Pump Available Yellow 89 3 Cavity Level > 48.5(59)ft or Pressurizer Level > 30% =2/N Orange 67 4 RCS level > 33' =2/N Red 05 TOTAL M l 5 No Freeze Seals Below Rx Vessel Flange =1/N i 6 Reactor Defueled =1 ) l CORE COOUNG 11 One SDC Train Operatin except as allowed by TS) =4/N Green 10 12 21 Second SDC Train =2/N Yellow 89 31 Refuelino cavity . 48. )ft with Rx head removed =2/N Orange 6-7 l 41 Makeup' Source and V 51 Loops filled and S/Gs AvaAable for OTC (prevent boiling) =2/N Red 0-5 TOTAL M
=2/N
- 6) Reactor defueled =10/N)
RCS PRESSURE CONTROL 1 RCS depressunzed and vented =1 WN) Green 10 - 12 2 At least one Pressunzer safety available =3/N Yellow 89 3 2 PORVs (or SDC Suction Reliefs) available for LTOP =3/N Orange 67 4 RCPs and PZR Htts Tagged out or PZR Bubble 5 HPSI inoperable:
=2/N Red 05 TOTAL W Unit 1: 1 HPSI inoperable < 276*, other HPSI or all CHG P inoperable below 236' Unit 2: 1 HPSIinoperable < 200*
CONTAINMENT
- 1) Full Pressure Containment Integrity Set =10/N) Green 10 - 12
- 2) No Core Afterations or =4/N Yellow 8-9 Containment Air Tight =1/N Orange 67 Containment isolabon systems available Y=1/N Red 0-5 TOTAL ' N J
- 3) Vessel Level > 33 ft or. JY=6/N Containment Closure Team Established JY=1/N Containment isolabon systems available (Y=1/N 2 containment coolers available (Y=1/N
*Tirne to boil' > 30 minutes (Y=1
- 4) Reactor defueled (Y=10/N)
FUEL POOL COOLING 1 1 Train of Fuel Pool Cooling available Y=6/N) Green 10 12 2 Second Train of Fuel Pool Cooling available Y=2,M Ye!!ow 8-9 3 RWT and FP Punt PP Available for M/U Y=2/N) Orange 67 . _ 4 Primary Makeup Water hose station available Y=1/N) Red 05 TOTAL "~ ~ 5 ICW makeup available W~
- Mime to boil
- in minutes
/R13
. . . . . _ .. . - . . . . . . ~ .- .-- .. - - . .. .- . . . . . _ .
I e y PMAl Form Version: 0 Corrective Action Form o PMAI Site:ESL Source Number: PM96-04-130 Document: SSC PERFORMANCE 1 Originator:SCS Due Date: 4/25/96 Assigned Deptartment: SCE SCE/KULAVICH Q _ Implementor Name Unit Outage Mode SNO NCR OWA
Description:
REVIEW ATTACHED AND VALIDATE INFORMATION. PLEASE INFORM: B. WALCHESKI OR M. SNYDER IF ATTACHED GOAL SETTING & MONITORING FORM REQUIRES UPDATE. PGM APPROVAL N18/96. l Acceptance section l Status / Comments:
/ / -
I understand and accept bility of the above tasted action and date yp'artrnent Manager Signature [oe oate utensionmansrer sesponsioiiity aequests j Extend To Date Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Onginator/Date Manager /Date t_ xtena io vate Mequest Dy IvaT ;aupervisouvate vnginatouuste Managermate Reasons: Appvd By XP ER Resp. To Request by /Date Supervisor /Date Manager /Date Recipient /Date l l Reasons:
%ompletion Section j l Completion Date: Close4ut Documents:
Comments:
~ . -
l Cornpleted By: //K bMd / 8db Date: . [ Reviewed By- / DW AVI SC6 Date: I Approved By: / ke Date: Gdic Reviewed By: / I Date:
- v
/
SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 59 - Emerg. Diesel Gens. Status:(a)(1) Updated: 11 Apni,1996 , Unit: 1 Performance Monitorino Period: 36 months Performance Criteria: Unavailability: <167 hrs /yr per train OOS (4 Otr. rolling total) Reliability: 5 2 MPFFs per train per 18 month period Start Test 3/20; 4/50; 5/100 PLPC 3: Unplanned ESF Actuations $1 each unit PLPC 4: 0 unplanned " red" SSA during outages UNAVAILABILITY-Unit 1 EDG Unavailable Hours 350.00 300.00 - 250.00 , 1 A EDG
$ 200.00 - Target 167 hrs 150.00 - IO O 100.00 '
- 4 1 A EDG 50.00 - .... - ** .
Total Q2 95 0395 Q4 95 Q196 Period RELIABILITY: List all failures (indicate train for risk sig. SSCs), corrective actions and MPFFs: (attach supporting documents as apphcable, e.g. CRs, ADM 17.08 Figs, etc.) 11/16/95 - Start-up air tank valve V-59125 leakage severe enough to render out of service. Los s of 1 of 4 10/5/95 - Dunng sury, run,1B 12-cyl engine exhibited a fuel leak, degrading 1 of 2 trains 9/5/95 - 1B EDG failed to start on demand. Govern. had failed MOP, possibly due to environ. condrtions. 9/1/95 1B EDG tripped on high crankcase press. No. 9 power pack piston head severly damaged. 6/6/95 - 1 A1 EDG tripped by TS-59-002A (shutdown temp. switch). Cause revealed incorrect calsbration 5/17/95 - 182 EDG failure to load due to govern. act. shutdown solenoid pickup tube break. MPFF. 10/28/94 - 18 EDG was not responding due to loose connection at trans term block of volt. regulator. 11/94.10/94 - EDG starting air compressor problems due to corrosion and dirty air & fuel filters. 5/4/93 - 1 A2 EDG tnpped by TS-59-003a. which was bad. New switch model installed. PLANT LEVEL PERFORMANCE-Report PLPC. If PLPC exceeded determine if SSC was cause Unit i lost 15 days of availability due to EDG governer overhauls / grounds and 1B2 cylinder failure. Trends: The 1B EDG has exceeded the unavailabilty performance enteria. The EDGs have experienced degradatons and failures causing an exceedance of reliability entena. The EDGs are no longer in accelerated testing due to Start Test exceedance. The EDGs are in (a)(1) status (repetitive MPFF - U1/U2 EDGs). See Fig. 4 for goals / monitoring activities.
t , SSC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SSC: 59 - Emerg. Diesel Gens. Status:(a)(1) Updated: 11 April,1996 Unit: 2 l Performance Monitorina Period: 36 months Performance Criteria: l Unavailability: <100 hrs /yr per train OOS (4 Qtr. rolling total) Reliability; 5 2 MPFFs per train per 18 month period Start Test: 3/20; 4/50; 5/100 PLPC 3: Unplanned ESF Actuations si each unit PLPC 4: 0 unplanned " red" SSA during outages UNAVAILABILITY: l Unit 2 EDG Unavailable Hours
)
8.00 ,0}}