ML20149M592
| ML20149M592 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 12/06/1996 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20149M591 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-395-96-99, NUDOCS 9612170443 | |
| Download: ML20149M592 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000395/1996099
Text
._
_
.-.
.
'
.
SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE REPORT
SUMER NUCLEAR PUWT
50-395/96-99
I.
BACKGROUE
The SALP board convened on November 13, 1996, to assess the nuclear
4
safety performance of the Summer Nuclear facility for the period
January 29, 1995, through October 26, 1996. The board was conducted in
accordance with Management Directive 8.6, " Systematic Assessment of
Licensee Performance." Board Members were J. R. Johnson (Board
Chairperson), Deputy Director, Division of Reactor Projects.
A. F. Gibson, Director, Division of Reactor Safety, and F. M. Reinhart,
i
Acting Director, Project Directorate II-1, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation. This assessment was reviewed and approved by the Regional
Administrator.
II.
PLANT OPERATIONS
This functional area addresses the control and execution of activities
directly related to operating the facility.
It includes activities such
as plant startup power operation, plant shutdown, and response to
It also includes initial and requalification training
programs for licensed operators.
Overall
aerformance in the Plant Operations area remained superior
during t1e assessment period. Unit performance was characterized as a
very stable period of power operations with relatively few transients,
no plant trips, generally conservative decision making, and a good focus
on safety.
Operator performance was very good during the relatively few shutdowns
and startups conducted. A special steam generator moisture carry over
test was well controlled.
Senior Reactor Operators demonstrated
excellent supervisory skills, and strong operator knowledge and ability
I
was demonstrated during plant evolutions as well as during
requalification training.
Rotation of licensed control room operators
to auxiliary building tours was effective. Auxiliary building operators
were thorough in monitoring and recording system parameters during their
rounds and were generally knowledgeable of their duties.
Performance during in plant fuel handling and tagging activities and in
response to support system aanel alarms remained a challenge.
Locked in
alarms on the control room iVAC panel and untimely resolution of a fuel
handling building differential pressure condition demonstrated a need to
improve questioning attitudes. Self-verification programs were
ENCLOSURE
l
9612170443 961206
l
ADOCK 05000395
G
.
_
_ _ _ ~ , _ -
_ . . .
_
._ _ _._
!
-
,
.
.
l
2
i
generally adequate: however, two significant events during the most
recent refueling outage indicated a need for improved self checking to
'
assure operation of designated equipment and to assure completenm of
'
procedures prior to use.
,
,
Plant operations management demonstrated a commitment to assessing plant
!
risk during planning and scheduling activities as well as during special
'
i
system configuration in a refueling outage. Station management provided
i
excellent risk information in the control room in the form.of operator
i
!
. aids listing special refueling conditions, abnormal operating
j
procedures, applicable boration flow paths, and time to boil in the
'
spent fuel pool. Management provided the operations staff a " safety
1
function matrix" to assist shift supervisors and the operations
i
scheduling staff to evaluate the impact on plant risk of approving
4
j
preventive maintenance activities on line.
i
Operations management demonstrated a conservative approach to unit
!
operational decisions. - Technical Specification Limiting Conditions for
i
0peration were properly entered when equipment was degraded and during a
j
critical temporary system realignment.
Power reductions were conducted
!
prior to several planned maintenance activities as a contingency to
assure that reactor conditions would remain stable if secondary plant
4
p
transients occurred. A station wide standdown was conducted to review
safety procedures as a preventative measure and not in response to any
a
'
.
special event.
3
i
Operational procedures and programs were fundamentally sound and
resulted in good adherence. Opc ator workarounds were well-managed with
.
causes and corrective actions identified, responsibilities assigned, and
j
completion dates scheduled.
4
ll
Management self assessment activities were generally effective. Monthly
operations monitoring included a trend of personnel errors by shift and
j
a performance annunciator panel assessment of personnel, program, and
!
equipment performance indicators. Support for benchmarking observations
'
!
by other utilities was strong and the licensee was active in initiatives
J
with other utilities to learn and share good practices. This was
j
demonstrated by several rotations in management positions,
implementation of good practices from other utilities, and a human
j'
performance critique of a wrong component operation by an outside
!
utility.
The Plant Operations area is rated Category 1.
I
III. MAINTENANCE
This functional area includes activities associated with diagnostic,
predictive, preventive, and corrective maintenance of plant structures,
i
systems and components; maintenance of the physical condition of the
plant; and training of the maintenance staff.
It also includes
surveillance testing, in-service inspection and testing, instrument
.
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
__
_ _ __
_
_.
._
.
l
!
3
calibration, operability testing, post maintenance testing, post outage
testing, containment leak rate testing, and special testing.
Management demonstrated strong commitment to and support of maintenance
activities. Coordination with Engineering to resolve related technical
issues was excellent. Overall, the licensee demonstrated superior
performance in implementing the station maintenance program and in
resolving related technical issues.
Diagnostic, preventive, and corrective maintenance was well performed in
that resolution of technical issues and actions to repair heat exchanger
head flange leaks on the residual heat removal and spent fuel pool
cooling systems were effective.
The licensee continued their excellent performance in inspection and
,
testing programs. Surveillance activities were planned, conducted in a
i
professional manner, and resulted in a high degree of confidence that
the tested components would perform as designed.
In addition,
surveillance activities satisfactorily demonstrated equipment
)
operability.
In service inspection and testing programs were
i
effectively implemented.
Instrument calibrations were performed within
,
required calibration due dates. Outage and post-maintenance testing was
i
performed well, especially with regard to station modifications to
accommodate an approved power uprate accomplished during the last
refueling outage in the Spring of 1996. Containment leak rate testing
was well performed on containment penetrations. The containment purge
supply and exhaust isolation valves, with resilient seals which require
l
frequent testing, were well within the leakage acceptance criteria.
The licensee provided strong supervision, and technicians demonstrated
aggressive questioning attitudes. Work packages were thorough and
complete, and the backlog of work items was well managed.
Self-assessments, root cause analyses, and trending remained strong and
effective.
In this regard, an excellent licensee initiative replaced
i
the Off Normal Occurrence reporting system with an in depth Condition
Evaluation Report system that focused on system trending. These trends
will be evaluated by quality assurance personnel.
i
Maintenance personnel performing work were experienced, well trained,
and very knowledgeable of plant procedures and equipment. Work areas
were orderly and well maintained. Material stored in maintenance
storage areas was properly identified and protected. Working
relationships within the maintenance department and among other
departments were supportive and constructive.
Plant management at all levels was well versed on the details of the
i
maintenance rule.
Personnel were able to demonstrate comprehensive
knowledge of the rule in their appropriate area of respansibility.
In
'
support of the maintenance program, as an excellent initiative, the
licensee developed a " safety function matrix" to assist in evaluating
and managing the impact of on line maintenance with regard to plant
,
!
4
_ . _ _ ._. _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _
,
'
.
'
i
^
4
safety. The matrix helped to maximize plant safety by managing the
1
l
combinations of _ equipment simultaneously taken out of service on each
train and by preventing planned simultaneous work on opposite trains.
l
i
'
While maintenance procedures were generally of high quality, attention
to detail in using and revising the procedures was a challenge.
i
,
While the material condition of the plant was good, additional
challenges included reducing some water and oil leaks.
.
The Maintenance area is rated Category 1.
IV.
ENGIEERING
This functional area addresses activities associated with the design of
plant modifications and engineering support for operations,' maintenance,
surveillance and licensing activities.
The licensee's performance in the areas of design control and
maintenance of the licensing basis was strong. The engineering workload
was well managed, the turnover of design activities previously performed
i
by their primary architect / engineer was well planned, and procedures for
reviewing changes to the facility were sufficiently detailed to ensure
compliance with 10 CFR 50.59. An Engineering Design Control Board was
established and was effective in prioritizing design changes and
disseminating design information to the appropriate staff. Several.
i
errors in the design control process were identified by the licensee.
.
Root causes were identified and appropriate corrective actions were
im)1emented. This performance was a noted improvement over the last
SA_P period.
'
Engineering provided effective support to Plant Operations. Challenging
!
design issues, including high moisture carryover from the new steam
generators and an unexpected neutron flux tilt, were resolved to improve
'
plant performance. The backlog of engineering work was wil managed
,
enabling timely response to problems identified by operators.
Operator
!
workarounds were aggressively pursued.
i
Maintenance problems were resolved in a timely manner.
Engineering
worked closely with Maintenance on several design changes that improved
plant reliability.
Problem identification and root cause analysis of
equipment issues supported timely, effective resolution.
The licensee's performance in the area of self assessment directed
toward engineering was good. The Engineering organization initiated
i
frequent contacts with other licensees to identify opportunities for
e
improvee performance. The Quality Assurance organization contributed by
performing an in depth audit of the design control program.
!
!
- _ . ,
.
,
- ,
- . . , -
.
1
.
5
Technical engineering submittals made to the NRC were of high quality
with well prepared safety evaluations.
'
The Engineering area is rated Category 1.
V.
PLANT SUPPORT
This functional area addresses all activities related to the plant
support function, including radiological controls, radioactive
effluents, chemistry, emergency preparedness, security, fire protection,
and housekee;..ng.
The radiological control program was effective in protecting the health
and safety of plant workers and members of the public. The onsite
radiation )rotection program controlled internal and external radiation
exposures )elow regulatory limits. Site ALARA and personnel
contamination control measures were generally successful throughout the
period although some decline was noted. Specifically, contamination and
contaminated material were found outside control boundaries. Control of
4
contaminated material is a challenge.
Offsite radiation exposure to members of the public was substantially
below regulatory limits. The environmental monitoring program confirmed
effective effluent controls in that only trace amounts of radioactivity
were detected in the environs of the plant.
Effective chemistry programs were implemented to inhibit degradation due
to corrosion of components in both primary and secondary systems. The
program for handling, packaging and transport of radioactive materials
functioned very well.
'
The emergenry preparedness program was generally effective in
maintaining site readiness to respond to emergencies. However, actual
response indicated some decline in performance. Challenges were noted
in developing challenging emergency exercise scenarios and in
maintaining awareness of siren system status in order to make timely
reports.
Several improvements were made to the Alert and Notification
System sirens to make them more reliable. Preparations for a hurricane
minimized the risks and potential damage to plant facilities from rain
and high winds.
The licensee continued to implement and support the Physical Security
Plan, procedures and associated programs in an outstanding manner. The
security program was strong and well managed. The protected area access
control equipment was reliable and effective. Station management was
active in identifying and correcting potential problems.
The Fire Protection program performance declined but was generally
implemented in an adequate manner during this period. Human performance
errors persisted throughout the aeriod and caused deficiencies in the
implementation of the program.
iaintenance and testing of fire
.
.
.
.
- - - _ . _ _ _ _ .
. - _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . . _ _ _ _ _
- - -
_ _ - . . __ .
_ . _
,-
i
o
i
'
,
6
'
protection systems were satisfactory. Organization and staffing changes
.
-
were made late in the period in a effort to improve performance and some
improvement was evident. Quality assurance audits were thorough and
>
3
corrective actions were timely. Housekeeping was satisfactory but
additional improvements could be made in some areas.
,
<
,
>
'
i
The Plant Support area is rated Category 2.
'
'
4
i
\\
-
1
I
!
l
.1
.
.
.
'
$
..
I
i
1
9
1
,
v
-
r