ML20198B434

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Summary of 860418 Meeting W/Util in Bethesda,Md Re Util Proposed Plant Performance & Mgt Improvement Program in Light of 851226 Transient.List of Attendees & Viewgraphs Encl
ML20198B434
Person / Time
Site: Rancho Seco
Issue date: 05/14/1986
From: Miner S
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TAC-60462, NUDOCS 8605210624
Download: ML20198B434 (24)


Text

, L,

.b 6 - o I &

d' May 14, 1986 y $9 - 3d 1 LICENSEE - Sacramento Municipal Utility District FACILITY - Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station SUBJECT - Summary of Meeting on April 18, 1986 with Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD)

On April 18, 1986, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) met with the NRC staff in Bethesda to review SMUD's proposed plant performance and management improvement program for the Rancho Seco plant. This presentation was a follow-up to the meeting held between SMUD and senior NRC management on March 24-25, 1986 where SMUD was requested to take a broader perspective regarding the issues affecting the safe and reliable operation of the Rancho Seco plant beyond the narrow focus of responding to the December 26, 1985 transient. Enclosure 1 is a list of the attendees. Enclosure 2 is a copy of the material presented by SMUD at the meeting.

SMUD presented an outline of its program to improve its management organization, systems and procedures, communications, and plant performance.

The organization is being restructured to include six departments vs the present three, with new management personnel being brought in from outside SMUD. Management systems and procedures, functional interfaces and information flow (dissemination and feedback) will be evaluated. From the evaluation, recommendation for change or improvement will be made for implementation to improve overall management performance. The plan has been reviewed and approved by management.

The performance indicators SMUD will use to judge management performance are (1) plant availability, (2) forced outage rate, (3) reactor trips, (4) NRC violation, (5) NRC SALP ratings, (6) INp0 findings, (7) low level solid radio-active waste, (8) personnel radiation exposure and (9) lost time accidents. Their near term goal is to have a better than 60% plant availability, no greater than 10% forced outage rate and less than 3 reactor trips per year.

The licensee has organized a performance analysis group to develop a program beyond that currently established to respond to the December 26, 1986 transient to improve the overall plant performance of Rancho Seco. The program will incorporate a short term element requiring resolution prior to restart and a longer term element. The licensee will do a deterministic failure consequences analysis primarily on motive power systems to determine whether system failures could (1) cause a reactor trip, (2) challenge safety systems and/or impact the ability to stay in the " Post-Trip Window" (predicted reactor coolant pressure and temperature and steam outlet temperature and pressure). Equipment and or system whose failures will result in one or more on these conditions will be evaluated for modificatinn, enhanced procedures, enhanced training and possible testing. In addition, SMUD stated they will conduct interviews with their staff to obtain issues and concerns regarding plant design and operations. They will also factor into their restart program precursor documents referenced in the NUREG-1195 report (IIT Report) and such things as I&E Bulletins and Notices, LER's, Trip Reports, etc.

N s

$$ h2

The licensee indicated that some of the items will be implemented in parallel with the analysis and evaluation portion of the program. They expect the analysis and evaluation part of the program will be completed in June to support-issuance of the Rancho Seco startup report for NRC review early in July 1986.

The NRC staff had the following major comments:

1. The staff suggested that, in addition to low level solid radioactive waste, radioactive liquid waste (releases) should be considered as a performance indicator.
2. The startup program should be comprehensive enough to provide reasonable assurance that when restarted the plant can be safely and reliably operated. It is not necessary that the program be like the Davis-Besse program. However, they should be prepared to justify their program when it is compared to what appears to be a more comprehensive test program being conducted at Davis-Besse.
3. The staff questioned whether the deterministic failure consequences analysis program limited to only the motive systems will result in a sufficiently comprehensive start-up program to demonstrate reasonable assurance of reliable and safe operation.
4. The staff also noted that the test program described appeared rather limited. l

. In conclusion, SMUD indicated that it will consider all of the staff's comments made during the meeting in developing its restart program and report.

% %te ,y Sydney Miner, Project Manager PWR Project Directorate #6 Division of PWR Licensing-B

Enclosures:

As Stated cc w/ enclosures: See next page PBD#6 SMiner, k 5/g./86

MEETING

SUMMARY

DISTRIBUTION Licensee: Sacramento Municipal Utility District

  • Copies also sent to those people on service (cc) list for subject plant (s).

Docket File NRC PDR L PDR P8D-6 Rdg JStolz SMiner 0CLD EJordan BGrimes ACRS-10 NRC Participants DCrutchfield JSWermiel RWeller GKalman CMcCracken KWichman NLauben DFieno JTBeard GEdison FSchroeder RJones WRegan RWright JCalvo

o I

'[ Enclosure 1 RANCHO SECO MEETING

. APRIL 18, 1986 L

. NAME' ORGANIZATION

~

Sydney 111ner NRR/PWR-B Lew Miller RV Dennis Crutchfield NRR/PWR-B J.S. Wenniel NRR/PWR-B Rick Weller NRR/PWR-B

George Kalman NRR/PWR-B

! Conrad McCracken NRR/PWR-B Keith Wichman NRR/PWR-B

l. Norm Lauben NRR/PWR-B Daniel Fieno NRR/PWR-B J.T. Beard NRR/0 RAS J.L. Crews' RV Henry Bailey IE/EAB Gordon E. Edison NRR/PWR-B John F. Stolz NRR/PWR-B Frank Schroeder NRR/PWR-B l Robert Jones NRR/PWR-B l RC De Young Consultant to SMUD

( Wm. H. Regan- NRR/PWR-B

! Robert Wright NRR/PWR-B Jose A. Calvo NRR/PWR-B i

i l

l l

I l

l l

PLANT PERFORMANCE e AND MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM improvement = General Manager Program Overview Panel Asst. General Manager, Nuclear i

Nuclear Dept.

____ Performance . _ _ _

Review Panel Managers improvement independent Manager e rJuclear Plant

. Quatit y

. Engineering Asst.

  • Trainino PerIormance

. ucensino improvement -

Manager l l Mgmt. Process Performance Resource / Schedule Review Group Analysis Group Monitoring e Organization

  • Performance . nesources improvement Plan e Psocurement

. Management systems

& Procedures

  • Procedures e schedule e Functional inter f aces .
  • Departmental Direction

& Interface

. information Dissemination

& Feedback . FinC Interf ace

. Performance Indicators 5

N

~

ORGANIZATION oCHANGEO .ORGANIZA TIONAL STRUCTURE .A T .SEVERAL LGVELS h

- SIX DEPARTMENTS VS THREE

- REORGANIZA TION A T DEPARTMENT LEVEL .

ONEW MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL IN PLACE

- PERSONNEL FROM .OUTSIDE SMUD

- PERSONNEL WITH PROVEN RECORDS j

= s

~

! . c mr5 $ ~

l

l825]

MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AND PROCEDURES .

  • ARE ADEQUA TE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS .IN PLACE TO:

- PLAN

- ORGANIZE _

- S TA FF

- DIRECT

- CONTROL e DO PROCEDURES ADEQUhTELY ADDRESS THE .

MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS THEY ARE INTENDED TO IMPLEMENT

  • RECOMMEND CHANGES OR IMPROVEMENTS ,

.:g pl s

'A 8e3

. 3-

18231 FUNCTIONAL INTERFACES

  • DETERMINE PRESENT FUNCTIONAL INTERFACES
  • EVALUA TE EFFECTIVENESS
  • RECOMMEND . CHANGES .OR .lMPRO VEMENTS I

i 4

. =

w k

u 4 e ,

leuJ l

I t'

I 2

INFORMATION DISSEMINATION AND FEEDBACK

  • VERTICAL COMMUNIOA TION METHOLbS'-

i i

  • HORIZONTAL COMMUNICATION METHODS e FEEDBACK METHODS -

e RECOMMENDA TIONS FOR . CHANGE OR IMPROVEMENTS

- ~ ,

e O

e

- ~ .

I826l 4

-PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

  • PLANT A VAILABILITY
  • FORCED OUTAGE RATE i
9. REACTOR TRIP
  • NRC VIOLATIONS
  • LOW LEVEL SOLID RAD WASTE
  • PERSONNEL RADIATION EXPOSURE -
  • LOST TIME ACCIDENTS g.

Vv l

i

4 RANCHO SECO PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMEt1T PROGRAM PERFORAfANCE ANAL YSIS GROUP e Deterministic Failure *

  • Reduce Challenges Consequences , gg,pagggjon to Safety Systems ' ,
  • Plant Staff Interviews , p,gorggy e Enhance Plant Reliability e Precursor Review INPUT e implementation ESULTS e Reinforced Procedures
  • Event-related Actioins e Restart Report

, poggo ,,op

  • Selected Projects
  • Revised Living Schedule
  • BWOG Stop-Trip Program
  • Resource Allocation
  • Test Program Definition LONG TERAf BENEFITS
  • Pro-activs Approach ,

o Morale Improvemerst i e Project Management Program OSMUD_ , _ , , _ , , , , _ , ,

flANCHO SFCO NUCL F A4 ClNf R Af *tG STAfmM

  • Enhanced Quality Program 9

ll 9

1 l790]

PLANT PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT e SITUA TION:

Rel! ability suffers due to specific component failures

\ History suggests that causes are rectified only after event History shows that safety systems work '

e A C TION PL AN:

i Improve reliability by reducing challenge's Review Effect of Process System malfunctions Identify precursors to transients Implement effective compensatory measures l

  • SELECTION CRITERIA-  !

i Cause a reactor trip?

Challenge a safety system? '

I impact ability to stay in post-trip window?

t

  • RESULTS OF REVIEW:

Appropriateness of procedural guidance Implement corrective action

2800-2600- POST TRIP,:

WINDOW s #jD 2400- \...

[

o \ r

/y

  • / ,

2200 - ,_

s / p 9 ,o a /

w ,d

$ 2000 - .

SUBC00 LED. - -.

s

/ --

/

" REGION '

l /

E o s

a ,d

,_ 1800 - / ,

  • ,/ 'o t; -;/ #

e d ,

1600 - SUPERilEAT

$j ..p

- E Ui m: / /

/ REGION y /., . ...I ,,. n m 1400 - -

, ..g .

m @ '/

9 g 1200 -

STEAM PRESSURE; y p f

3 LIMIT A ,

g ,

g /

,(

3 ,

u 1000_ ,L ,

oc -'

9. d,- @

p

' 77 END PolNT-POST TRIP illTH FORCED y ',@%g u SU8C00 LED '

7 CIRCULATION (T H0T &TCOLD) AND h

800 - MARGIN LINE- ,

s '

d a

g. FOR NATURAL CIRCULAil0N (T COLD I

' ' NORMAL OPERATING POINT-POWER 600 - - ,

OPERAT10NHOT (T I y '

[~ l END POINT-POST TRIP WITH NATURAL 400 - l l CIRCULATIONHOT (T I L.J ,

200 hlllhlllllffff f 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 REACTOR COOLANT AND STEAM OUTLET TEMPERATURE, OF

r

~~ ~~ ~

5

=

PERFORhfANCE lh1PROVEhfENT PROGRAh1 IN T .

Selected Deterministic Profocts Failure Consequences Precursor BWOG Stop-Trip '

R e vie w Program Plant Staff f 1 - G Event &

Intervic ws NUREG 1195 Action List u

E VA L UA TION Recommendations A ssign Review & Resolution ~

Dispositioning Board Organization i i Plan & In vestigation Budget '

~

Proposed Disposition DISPOSITION '

Feed bacl< Disposition by Programmatic to RRRB Performance ~

Analysis Group . Trend Analynis I I e o y CLOSE A C TION A C TION No furthe, r Non-Startup to o action required required for startup Living Scheduto or CCL thfPLEMENTA TION v I

Implementation l

using approved ECN/DCN, Operations,

  • Power Ascension

' Procedurcs, Engincaring, Training Programs Test Program I

l784l PERFORMANCE ANAL YSIS GROUP 1

FOCUS EFFORTS OF ALL NUCLEAR DEPARTMENTS -

DIRECTED B Y NUCLEAR PROJECTS MANA GER COMBINES RESOURCES OF: .

l Operations including Maintenance & Technical Support Engineering l

Quality

Training ,,

\

Licensing l

Scheduling e A CTIVITIES

  • l - ' Planning .

Resource Commitment

  • l Prioritization Budgeting .

TREND ANAL YSIS ON RECOMMENDA TIONS

<3

17 87l RECOMMENDA TIONS REVIEW AND RESOLUTION BOARD _

  • ' Chairman from Recovery Management Group
  • Review, Resolve, . Propose Priority
  • Assigns Dispositioning Responsibility e Determines Adequacy and Appropriateness of Proposed Dispositions
  • Processes Recommendations per Procedure
  • Multidiscipline RRR Board Maintenance HP/ Chemistry Operations

- Tech Support

- Nuclear Engineering

- Licensing Quality Training 9

[71/l 1 DETERMINISTIC FAILURE CONSEQUENCES e IDENTIFY EFFECT OF PROCESS SYSTEM FAILURES EVALUA TION CRITERIA:

-Cause Reactor Trip

-Challenge To Safet'y System

-Impact Ability To Stay In " Post-Trip" Window e APPL Y PROCESS TO

-Motive Power Systems -

  • Electrical Power Supplies
  • Instrument Air

-Both " Primary" & "Secortdary" Systems e ANTICIPA TES "REAL" EVENTS Verfiles That Procedures,. Training & Hardware Are Appropriate

  • DOES NOT ASSUME THA T ONL Y " HISTORIC # OR " DESIGN" ,

EVENTS CAN OR WILL OCCl)R.

  • ANAL YSIS B Y TEAMS,. COMPOSED OF:

-Operations & Design Engineers

-Op era t ors

-Plant Techn'icians

  • TEAM TRAINING s

i I @

C t

}

' C CAVH lamroN BESN

N m =

O secivreS gdlB G/O '

N >

Z M A noitalitneV lamroN BR o f i

r C M M <O O C 0861/WK024 $-

0 + o sretaeH rezirusserP $ o ],

,o y A N '

C -* O =o I W W Z ~

noitalitneV gdlB enibruT srehsiloP WF etasnednoC Eoh o O M 67 Uc Q

  • xx =.

C o

A rosserpmoC riA

$hOy I 3C m 3C o C d .

o .,

@ 3< e U oa=

O .E g o

-Z. m @ti

=a oC m

0' O

g s u N a i

CAVH gdlB ytiruceS _s O[O u T =j^ _U l -C o-oo N I e x-

~

m T yg D C l

C a < @ >063C O O C CAVH gdiS nimdA .C o X m "

ag N L19'EO o +

g 8o EC>

M X gnilooC PFS o7 0 ~Q

-Q s VOM ssecorP yradnoceS I o

> 3 o 3 ~$ E _-

T N sre'taeH rotoM tnalP enicruT 3-$15U oQ oOI g 4 Q noitalitneV lamroN BR 3 p:

> O o a o M 03oCm 0861/WK492 y sretaeH rezirusserP i N o C 3C O M I M -'r : 2 "o 5 Z 1

srotinoM daR yradnoceS oy_o noitalitneV gdlB enibruT $ =g a

~

1 505 =E 1 <Ey3 2 o o= o o - ._

B rosserpmoC riA 25OIOO

" " P *. m i

l l ecruoS rewoP detceff A metsyS secneuqesnoC-B v

_. ._ _. _ _r c- __r l788l

\ PLANT STAFF INTERVIEWS .

  • Obtain Issues and Concerns of Knowledgeable Staff Reguarding Plant Design and Operations .

Identification of "Near Misses" & Potential Problems ,

  • Systematic Interview Process e Goal:

Interview Majority of Staff Members Consider Ongoing Program

  • Interview:

Operators Plant Engineers Technicians '

Mechanics Inspectors / Auditors Instructors Design Engineers

  • Broadens Scope Beyond 12-26 Event

=~ -w hem -

.+w=== hm .h -. m..= , m em-m.

R .

PRECURSOR REVIEW

  • BA W 1564 .

NUREG 073 7

  • ADDITIONAL SCOPE '

I&E Bulletins I&E Notices SOER 's .

Rancho Seco: .

Trip Reports t l

ODR 's LER 's ,

e REVIEW WILL CONSIDER Likelihood as Pre ~ cursor Event .

" Narrowness" of Previous Reviews Scope of Response , ,

. Effect of Plant Configuration Changes

~E

~

x-l 789l BWOG STOP-TRIP PROGRAM Objective and Goals j Program Objectives

'l e . Reduce number of trips / transients on B&W i Owners Group Plants '

l o Ensure acceptable plant response dbring trips and transients WhiCh occur.

Program Goals

1. By the end of 1990 the average plant trip frequency will be less than two per year.
2. Severe transients as classified by measureable .

parameters will be reduced.

3. SMUD will be active in program.

e i

I .

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

2 '

E SELECTED PHOJECTS

  • ANTICIPATE DETERMINISTIC FAILURE CONSEQUENCE REVIEW
  • PROCEED DIRECTLY TO DISPOSITION *
  • EXAMPLES -

Instrument Air Syste'm Startup Transformer #2 Makeup Pump Interlocks E&F Bus DC Bus ICS/NNI

, . MSLF Logic l ' Component Cooling Water System

  • DETERMIAISTIC FAILURE CONSEQUENCE WILL ALSO BE DONE

~~ - - , -

lmi TEST PROGRAM PURPOSE Insure Modifications & Changes Accomplish Purpose Demonstrate Interface Between e Trained Operators -

e Operating Procedures e Plant & Control Room Hardware SPECIFIC ISSUES Demonstrate Satisfactory Response on:

e Loss of ICS Loss of NNI Loss .of Instrument Air .

l OTHER TESTING .

  • As Identified by Performance ,

improve

  • ment Program ls' l

4 3

l815l

SUMMARY

PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM: '

e evelops Confidence that Future Events will not Challenge Plant Design Basis i

{

  • Provides for Systematic Review of Transient Response
  • Provides " Broad Perspective" to issues which i

may have been Viewed Narrowly -

  • Gnhances Plant Reliability i
  • Reduces Challenges.to Safety Systems

~e Develops Confidbnce for Restart Decision

'f .

_ _ _ _ _ - - _ .