ML20153D596

Forwards Addl Info Re Problems Identified in INPO Evaluation That Identified Weaknesses in Several Operational Areas. Planned Upgrade Actions Also Encl.Plant Shutdown Down on 880419 to Upgrade Operational Performance

ML20153D596
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	05/04/1988
From:	Mcdonald R GEORGIA POWER CO.
To:	Murley T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
SL-4628-A, NUDOCS 8805090212
Download: ML20153D596 (10)

Text

, -ht .,

s-4 Georgia Power Company

,. 333 Piedrnont Avenue ~

' ~5 J At!anta, Georgia 30308 .

.. Telephone 404 526 6526 '

l Malbog Addressa Post Othee Box 4545 '

Atlanta Georgia 30362 Georgia Power Nuclear Operations Department W2 SM an Mm de SL-4628-a 3684N

^

X7GJ17-H230 f

Hay 4,1988 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission ATTN: Mr. Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, D. C. 20555 PLANT HATCH - UNITS 1, 2 NRC 00CKETS 50-321, 50-366 OPERATING LICENSES DPR-57, NPF-5 HATCH OPERATIONAL UPGRADE Gentlemen:

On April 19, 1988 Georgia Powcr Company initiated shutdown of both Hatch units to upgrade certain aspects of operational perfonnance. The principal basis for this unilateral action was an evaluation by the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INP0) completed on April 18, 1988 that identified weaknesses in several operational areas.

The purpose of this letter is to provide you with additional information regarding the problems and our planned upgrade actions. This additional information is provided in the enclosure as follows:

Enclosure (1): _

A sumary of the specific operational issues at Hatch..

Attachment (A): Our operational upgrade plan with detailed actions that the issues listed in ' Enclosure (1 ) . This address enclosure also shows the current status of each action.

The operational upgrade plan focuses on areas that will be addressed prior to plant restart. Most of the additions will be ccmpleted prior to restart while some subsequently of a less imediate nature will be addressed.

Attachment (B): Schedule for the restart of Hatch.

The action to shutdown Hatch was initiated by Georgia Power Company solely ib response to INP0 findings in the operational area and our own supported knowl edge of our situation (INP0 is a non-profit industry organization whose mission is to promote excellence in nuclear plant safety and reliability). Our conservative action in this matter was taken

\ \

7 8805090212 890504 ADOCK 05000321 fDR fMiB - . . . . _ .

, c p

9 4

8 f .

U. 3. Nuclear Regulatory Comission May 4, 1988 ,

Page~Two independent of the regulatory process, and is based on the standard' of excellence established by the industry through INPO. However, we fully recognize the NRC's interest and statutory responsibility for assuring j operational safety and reliability. Accordingly, the information in this letter and its accompanying enclosure are provided.

l , In addition to the material in this letter and information to be provided at our scheduled meeting on May 9,1988, we will inform you when we have determined that the plant is ready for start-up.

Sincerely, R. P. Mcdonald Executive Vice President Nuclear 0perations RPM /do

Enclosure:

Plant Hatch Operational Upgrade l c/w: (see next page) l c: Georgia Power Company

. T. Beck. ham, Jr.

l' Mr. i GO-NORMS l

1 l U. S. Nt. clear Regulatory Comission, Washington Mr. L. P. Crocker, Licensing Project f tanager - Hatch l

l U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Region II l W . J. N. Grace, Regional Administrator Mr. P. Holmes-Ray, Senior Resident Inspector - Hatch l

1 l

>. , .c ,

.e, .

t ENCLOSURE

, PLANT HATCH UNITS 1, 2-

• NRC 00CKETS 50-321, . 50-366 _

OPERATING LICENSES DPR-57, NPF-5 PLANT HATCH-OPERATIONAL UPGRADE

~

, In reviewing the results of the recent evaluation of Plant Hatch by the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, Georgia Power identified a narrow but important set of operating conditions and indications of performance that warranted priori ty attention and upgrading prior to the continuation of normal plar,t operations. They are as follows:

1. The ability of shift crews to respond to plant transients as demonstrated in the simulator needs significant improvement. '

2. During a plant startup and heatup, the monitoring and control of ,

the reactor and behavior in the control room were not up to industry professional standards.

3. The capability of control room personnel .to determine plant status and respond to plant conditions in an optimum manner is impaired by administrative and equipment conditions as follows:

a. Critical drawings in the co'1 trol roon designated for operator

• use are not updated in a usable manner to allow operators to

. quickly assess plant status,

b. Many instrument panel components and plant equipment are not identified with pennanent labels.

c. Under routine conditions, there are numerous annunciators that are continuously lighted and alarms that frequently -

recur due to either the present design or equip ent/ system abnormalities.

~

d. Numerous equipment clearances have remained in effect for

• several years.

We have placed the plant in cold shutdown in order to concentrate attention to these areas. The upgrade it desired in order to increase the i existing margin of safety upon which we base our strong confidence in nuclear power.

3684N SL-4628-a E-1 May 4, 1988 L

p-+

..-

• 3 .,

q. 4 -

, , 4

• M. 3 r.- , ,

y . ...

3 ENCLOSURE-(Continued) =

PLANT HATCH - UNITS 1, 2

. 4 NRC DOCKETS 50-321, 50-366 OPERATJNG LICENSES DPR-57; NPF-5 PLA'!T HATCH OPERATIONAL UPGRADE- ,

4 Attachment A provides our detailed plan for upgrading actions .with the -

current status of each indicated. Upon completion of these actions, INP0

, will provide a follow-up evaluation to help us verify the effectiveness of

- our actions. When we are confident'that we have achieved our objective, we will resume operations. Attachment B provides an estimated restart schedule.

Attachments:

Attachment A: Plant Hatch Plan and Operational Upgrade Status Report Attachment B: ' Plant Hatch Estimated Restart Schedule 4

l 3684N SL-4628-u E-2 May 4,1988

--4, - . - . . , - _ . . - , -n , v.,- , - - -- , 4~ ,c~,. ~n -.. , , , , , , . ., . - - , ..,....e , aw,, -- ,wy ,.. -

. ATTACHMENT A

'- ,' 5/4/88 PLANT HATCH PLAN AND OPERATIONAL. UPGRACE STATUS REPORT 4

10 Emergency Operating Procedures and Operator Skills in the Use of These Procedures

. . Uograde Actions Status

c. Completion of a technical Technical review has been performed to review and evaluation against compare the Hatch Emergency Operating the Emergency Procedure Guidelines Procedures (EOP) to the BWR Owners Group and correction of significant Emergency Procedure Guidelines (EPG). The identified deficiencies. EPG's are the standard from which all plants develop site specific E0P's. The review was conducted by GPC and General Electric Company representatives and revealed no significant technical deficiencies. Minor technical oeficiencies were resolved.

be Establish a Task Force with long The task force has been established and range objective of upgrading a charter issued. Example Emergency Emergency Operating Procedures. A Operating Procedures from similar scFedule for completing the' modifica- plants have been collected on-site for tions and retraining the operations detailed study. A revision leading to a staff must,be prepared, simplified set of Emergency Operating Procedures has been initiated with human factor improvements as one of the major considerations. Retraining is scheduled between July 25, 1988 and September 29, 1988 to address the Emergency Operating Procedures revisions.

c. Establish a schedule for upgrading Human factor improvements are scheduled identified human. factor areas, for completion. The initial response was to make minor improvements and enhance training. These improvements included better photographic techniques, and making certain steps "sequence insensitive." A major revision is scheduled to be completed in July 1988. Mahy sources will be used as inputs to the E0P Task Force for the procedure revi sion. These sources include:

- INP0 Assist Visit (April 1988) Comments

- General Electric Technical Review 4

- - - - - , , , . , , . . - . -. - - ~ , - - - . , , -. ,. ~

m1 -. .,

e

>> ~*

f

1. Emergency Operating Procedures and'0perator Skills in the Use of These Procedures (Cont'd)

Upgrade Actions

• Status

- c. (cont'd) , - General Electric Human Factor Review f

- Licensed Operator and Instructor Consnents

d. Retrain the present. licensed Immediate operator retraining began on April operators individually and as 8,1988 and will be completed by May 6,1988 a team in the use of the Emergency " to address specific INP0 concerns. This Operations Procedures, training focused on improving the operators' ability to respond to transients, with

• special emphasis on timely execution of containment control ' actions. Training is scheduled between July 25,1988 and September 29, ~1988 to introduce.the revised E0P's after human factor improvements are made.

e. Use senior operations management Senior operations management and and such technical' experts as independent technical experts will necessary to evaluate the perfonnance be used to evaluate operators in the use of of individual operators and each Emergency Operating Procedures, both operating shif t as a team, using individually and as an operating shift team scenarios involving extensive use of prior to the team being used for power i the Emergency Operating Procedures. operations. This evaluation is scheduled to l start on May 7,1988.

l l

i l

4 t

2. Conduct of Operations Within the Control Room Upgrade Actions Status 5

a. Arrange and hold reviens and. The President, CEO, and Chairman of the Board discussions about the. principles of of the Georgia Power Company has met with professionalism in the control room plant personnel to explain his expectations involving the following: for professionalism in the work place.

1. Shift Supervisor The Execut.ve Vice President has held

2. Operations Supervisor professionalism philosophy discussions with

3. Operations Superintendent plant supervisors and managers. The Vice

4. Manager of Operations President, Plant Manager, Manager of

5. Plant Manager Operations, and other managers have held

6. Vice President Plant Hatch reviews and discussions regarding

7. Executive Vice President, professionalism. Additional seminars have Nuclear Operations been scheduled for shift supervisors,

8. Chairman of Board, CEO, operations supervisors, and superintendents President of Georgia Power Company up through Operations line management to the Vice President.

b. Implement augmented procedures for Cor. trol room entry restrictions control board access control. have been strengthened to ensure unnecessary personnel are denied access with particular limitations on access to the main control boards.

c. Develop, using operator input, a code Licensed operators and supervisors, of conduct to be followed by control have developed a standard for control room personnel and others entering the room conduct. This standard has been control room. implemented in the control room rnd has resulted in increased professionalism,

d. Clarify responsibilitics and role of Control board walkdowns, monitoring and operator on the reactor control relief have been emphasized with licensed panel. operators and their supervision. Additional operating personnel are assigned to duty stations, which in most cases, are external to the main control room operating area.

l l

l l

l 1

4- 3 ,

l

i. 56 _0 erational Aids and Control Mechanisms i

.Uprgrade Actions Status

a. Correct deficiencies associated Deficiencies associated with critical with critical drawings and ensure that drawings have been corrected and copies of q drawings are correctly marked-up to critical drawings placed in the control room, reflect the as-built condition and are available to the operations personnel.

b Augment and + implement the procedures Procedures are in effect to maintain to ensure that critical drawings the critical drawings in the control room in the control room are maintained up-to-date, up-to-date.

c. Walkdown systems and identify current A plant walkdown has been performed, labeling which does not comply with Most deficiencies identified have been procedures and schedule the corrective resolved. The Executive Vice President actions. The Executive Vice President will review the status of renaining will approve tha scope of corrective corrective actions prior to start-up.

action to be completed prior to start-up,

d. Review current labeling procedures Plant procedures are in effect to and revise as necessary to ensure maintain plant labeling . These that the procedure adequately addresses procedures now provide feedback maintenance of the labeling system. mechanisms to replace missing or damaged labels,

e. Establish a policy and the necessary The policy has been established and procedures which allow the removal procedures drafted to address annunciators of single point inputs from multiple in a constant alann state. The policy point alanns, the removal of addresses conditionally disabling annunciator cards from limited input annunciators, compensatory measures, and annunciators, along with the necessary control mechanisms as required. The compensatory actions and control procedure will be in place prior to start-up, mechanisms until appropriate corrective action can be completed,

f. Establish a policy and the necessary The policy has been established and procedures which allow the operations procedures drafted to address annunciators personnel on shif t to conditionally in a constant alarm state. The policy disable temporarily nuisance type addresses conditionally disabling annunciators until such time that the annunciators, compensatory measures, and operational stitus of the plant would control mechanisms as required. The cause the aarunciator to provide valid procedure will be in pisce prior infonr.ation or the annunciator is to start-up.

mofified through the normal design process. 3

4 q.. .

. 3. Operational Aids and Control Mechanisms (Continued)

g. Initiate changes that are causing A review of control, board annunciators inappropriate or invalid that were in a continuously lighted annunciators to be lighted in the condition o'uring steady state operations was control room, conducted to determine the actions necessary to place the annunciator in the non-lighted condition. Design changes have been initiated for those annunciators that could be placed in the non-lighted state by an appropriate set point charge.

h. Implement a procedure for prioritizing A new operations procedure will be maintenance and. repair of instruments implemented by 5/7/88 to improve prioritiza-and equipment which contribute to tion of traintenance action for control room nuisance alarms and inappropriately instruments and annunciators.

lighted annunciator points,

f. Implement procedures for reviewing The review program for clearances has been open clearances every six months. enhanced such that when clearances reach an age of six months they are reviewed by operations management for consideration of continued use of the clearance procedure or whether they should be moved to other control mechanisms.

j. Implement other control mechanisms Increased emphasis has been placed on where appropriate to avoid the use of engineering support, procedure changes, and clearances for long term conditions or perfonnance of work orders that 9110w problems. Only those long term removal of longstanding equipment clearances specifically approved by clearances. Outstanding long-term clearances the Executive Vice President will be will be reviewed and approved by the continued for start-up. Executive Vice President prior to start-up.

0' i '

ATTACHMENT B

, et' - ',

. 5/4/88

. 4.,

PLANT HATCH ESTIMATED RESTART SCHEDULE -

4 Follow-up Evaluation by.IhP0 May 12-13,1988

-Completion of Upgrade Action May 13,1988 Georgia Power Company Determination of Readiness to Operate May 13,1988 Unit 2 Enter Condition 2 From Condition 4 May 14, 1988 6 Hours From .

Unit 2 ' Critical leaving Condition 4 Unit 2 Reach 50% Power May 18, 1988 Unit 1 Enter Condition 2 From Condition 4 May 18,1988 1

6 Hours From Unit 1 Critical leaving Condition 4 Unit 1 Reach 50% Power May 22,1988 Each unit is expected to be at 100% approximately 60 hours6.944444e-4 days <br />0.0167 hours <br />9.920635e-5 weeks <br />2.283e-5 months <br /> after reaching 50% power.

l

.