ML20198P824

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
SALP Rept 50-293/97-99 for Period 960407-970913
ML20198P824
Person / Time
Site: Pilgrim
Issue date: 11/04/1997
From:
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20198P814 List:
References
50-293-97-99, NUDOCS 9711120026
Download: ML20198P824 (7)


See also: IR 05000293/1997099

Text

.

.

-

.

.-

-.

-- -

.

.

.-

.

.

.

Enclosure 1

<

SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE (SALP)

.

I

PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION

Report No. 50 293/97 90

I,

BACKGROUND

,

'

The SALP Board convened on September 25,1997, to assess the nuclear safety

performance of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station for the pedod from April 7,1996,

through September 13,1997. The Board was conducted pursuant to NRC Management

Directive (MD) 8,6 (see NRC Administrative Letter 93 20) The Board members were

James T. Wiggins (Board Chairman), Director, Division of Reactor Safety, Region I (RI),

Chcries W. Hehl, Director, Division of Reactor Projects, Rl, and Bruce A, Boger, Director,

,

,

Reactor Projects 1/11, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. The Board developed this

assessment for the approval of the Region 1 Administrator,

The performance ratings and the functional areas used below are described in NRC MD

4

8,6, " Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP),"

,

11.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS - OPERATIONS

Overall performance in the operations area was generally good with improvements noted in

,

'

the control of operational activities and in the performance of licensed operator candidates

during initial examinations. The threshold for problem reporting was progressively being

lowered but operators and managers missed several problem plant conditions during plant

rounds and tours, Also, procedure quality issues and instances of improper use of

procedures cor.tinued to be identified by NRC, in addressing these problems, corrective

actions were weak.

Operations control of plant activities improved as line management implemented lessons

learned from the previous refueling outage and from other past events reflective of a weak

interface between operations and maintenance Operations management and operators

were given more time for oversight of operational activities because production

responsibilities were transferred from the operations department to the work control

department. Shift turnover briefings improved due to more effective participation by crew

members Also, just prior to the start of the last refueling outage, the plant manager

conducted procedural adherence training with all site personnel to reinforce the importance

i

of following procedures Effective oversight of vendor reactor fuel handlers led to a well

controlled reactor core offload and reload. Further, an improved control room environment

with less traffic and noise resulted from moving the administrative staff from the control

room to the operations support building. Collectively, these enhancements developed and

3

implemented by line management contributed directly, with only few exceptions, to the

enhanced operator performance during the last outage.

Improvements made to the corrective action process resulted in a lower problem reporting

'

threshold and a more thorough determination of root causes. Operators identified several

9711120026 971104

PDR

ADOCK 05000293

G

PDR

i

-

l

_ _ . .

. _ . . .

-

-

- - - - -

- - - - -

-

.

.

2

significant equipment issues at an early stage, but some lesser significant problems were

overlooked. An operator identified a subtle but significant equipment problem involving a

through wallleak in the heat exchanger channel head of the "B" reactor building closed

loop cooling water system resulting in a plant shutdown for repairs. Despite the lower

problem reporting threshold, operators and line managers missed some configuration

control discrepancies and indicator problems in the control room. Also, two longstanding

j

operator workaround conditions, that complicated post scram recovery efforts, were not

challenged by the operations staff.

Operators responded well to plant transients with few exceptions noted. An example was

the prompt operator response during a sudden insurge of seaweed on the intake structure

screens that resulted in a safe transition to a lower power level without damage to the sea

water pumps an improved response when compared to e similar event in the last SALP

period. Also, during the last refueling outage, operators responded effectively to two

significant events involving a main transformer f ailure and also a fullloss of offsite power

(Unusual Event). However, an operating crew f ailed to follow the abnormal procedure in

response to feedwater system regulating valve malfunction. Overall, the operational

transient history reflected positively on operator performance.

Operator training was generally effective, improvement was indicated by five of six

operator license candidates passing the NRC license examination. The increased use of

senior operating training personnel to analyze integrated crew responte to transients

contributed to more effective operations department self assessment. However, an

operator knowledge deficiency involving the generator out of phase block circuitry became

evident when several attempts were needed to resynchronize the generator onto the

electrical grid. The plant simulator did not model well the shrink and swell of reactor

vessel water level during power transient potentially impacting training effectiveness.

During the February 1997 scram, operators experienced shrink and swell that eventually

-

led to the isolation of the High Pressure Coolant Injection system which complicated

recovciy actions.

-

Despite efforts to improve, problems persisted in the area of procedure quality and use.

Procedure quality issues were contributing causes for an engineered safety feature

actuation, the unavailability of the station blackout diesel generator during a loss of offsite

power event, and the inadvertent isolation of the reactor vessel water level detectors.

Also, certain operational procedures were inadequate in that they potentially allowed

conditions outside the design bases such as for maximum and minimum flowrates for

containment cooling during a loss of coolant accident, instances of improper procedure

use occurred. Most notable was the failure of an operating crew to promptly shut down

the reactor on conditions of significant feedwater oscillations.

_

The Operations area is rated Category 2.

__

y

4 89L

.

4

3

111.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS - MAINTENANCE

Performanca in the maintenanco area was generally gor,d with some improvements noted

in work control and in increased management presence in the field. Overall, the material

condition of the plant improved and safety related equipment .eliability continued to be

very good. Aggressive actions were usually taken for significant maintenance related

equipment problems. Problems with balance of plant eo@ent resulted in some

challenges to operators during normal operation and pow - :ductioris.

Self assessment results were generally effective in making improvemonts especially in the

area of personnel and management performance involved with the control of work

production for outages and on-line maintenance. The work control group assumed work

production responsibilities from operations allowing operations to maintain a safety focus

especially during the last refueling outage. Improved performance of maintenance and

surveillance activities was achieved, in part, because of an increased management focus

and a maturing work planning process that implemented past lessons learned. Examples of

well planned activities included a major on-line reactor core isolation cooling outage and a

temporary weld repair to a spool piece in a salt service water pipe. Good field work

implementation resulted from effective planning (including mock-up), supervisory oversight,

and a knowledgeable work force. An example of good management oversight of work

activities included the identification of a discrepancy with the dimension of a salt service

water pump shaf t gib key by a new maintenance supervisor. Fewer missed surveillance

tests occurred due to improvements made to the master surveillance test program.

The material condition of the plant has generally improved. Aggressive actions were

usually taken for significant maintenance related equipment problems. For example, a

careful and thorough code repair was made to correct the longstar. ding problem with the

"B" reactor building closed cooling water (RBCCW) heat exchanger channel head. The

corrective maintenance running repair backlog has steadily declined as a result of changes

.

made to the work control process and increased management focus, in addition, the

reliabihty of safety related equipment remained very good. However some important

equipment problems did not receive appropriate attention. Balance of plhnt equipment

problems have challenged operators and resulted in some unplanned power reductions and

outages. As an example, feedwater regulating valve preventive maintenance problems

resulted in low power reactor water level oscillations necessitating a manual reactor scram.

Human performance in the maintenance area generally improved, but some problems

persisted. The maintenance staff performed very well during the last outage; workers

were noted to be experienced and stopped work when adverse conditions were identified

to obtain proper corrective actions. Pre-evolutionary briefings were detailed and conveyed

all the salient points of the work to be performed. Communications between the various

departments was generally good; operators and technicians generally remained aware of

plant conditions before, during and after testing. However, procedure quality and use

problems persisted. Several problems were noted with procedure content due to over-

.

reliance on vendor manuals and information. The damage to all tour main steam line plugs

(

and to one of the RBCCW pump seals resulted from an inadequate pros.,edure and work

planning guidance which generally referenced the vendor manual. Procedure use problems

inciuded an electrician using an incorrect crimping tool during the replacement of a safety-

--

.

- - _ _ - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

l

l

.

.

4

related motor actuator and a trip of one of the running residual heat removal pumps during

routine surveillance testing of its associated emergency bus. This later example also

reflected weakness in the interf ace between the maintenance worker and the operating

crew

The maintenance area is rated Category 2.

1

IV.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS ENGINEERING

Engineering management oversight and involvement in plant activities remained generally

good but some performance problems arose. The site staff planned and scheduled

engineering work such that significant emerging equipment problems were addressed

generally in a timely manner, in addition, management attention resulted in the reduction

of the backlog of vendor manual changes and open problem reports. Some self

assessment activities improved specific aspects of engineering performance. Problems

were noted in the interfaces among the design, installation and the ALARA organizations

which resulted in additional dose being incurred by workers installing the emergency core

cooling system (ECCS) strainer replacement modification.

In general, engineers provided good support to operations and maintenance. Operacility

determinations were usually of good quality. The quality of root cause evaluatiens was

also generally good. However, in some instances, technical support fell short. For

example, the evaluation for digital upgrade modLcations to an instrument bus transformer

was found to lack sufficient scope and depth.

Overall, system engineer performance was good, but some problems arose. Improvement

was realized in the reliability of key systems such as the reactor core isolation cooling

systerr, and the high pressure coolant injection system. Also, the system engineer

provided valuable direction during troubleshooting activities associated with the reactor

protection system (RPS) motor-generator set after a recent RPS trip and half-scram.

However, the operators' response to the February 1997 plant trip was complicated by

i ome longstanding degraded equipment conditions. Actions were added to procedures

rather than solving the problem and eliminating significant operator workarounds. Also,

during the March 1997, transformer failure event, the use of SBO diesel generator was lost

due to insufficient procedural guidance. Additionally, the NRC identified several control

room equipment deficiencies that had not been identified by operators or system engineers,

indicating that there was a weakness in equipment monitoring activities.

Design change and modification work, including temporary modifications, was performed

well. Safety evaluations were generally of adequate scope and of good quality. While

there were interface problems in the design and installation of the ECCS strainer

replacement, the basic design and analysis work associated with that modification was

sound and the vendor controls were generally good. This was significant given the tight

time constraints to design, f abricate and install the strainers.

- _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _

. . .

..

.

.. .

__. _ _ _ _ __

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ _.____

.

.

5

The NRC identified several significant problems associated with engineering activities

directed toward maintaining the design and licensing bases of the plant. Some of the

issues found during a self-assessment of the service water system remained open for

several years. A number of those issues were addresse . initially, by the application of

engineering judgement, were not placed in a formal corrective action system and their final

resolution was not achieved as of the Spring of 1997. NRC review of some of the issues

showed that the plant had been operating outside its design bases and that the required

report to NRC had not been made. The untimely resolutions of these issues reflected a

weak implementation of the technical and safety review process. In contrast to the above,

the NRC found that engineering activities related to the core spray system, including a

vertical-slice review, had assured that the system was being maintained per its design.

The Engineering area is rated Category 2.

V.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS - PLANT SUPPORT

Performance in the plant support areas was generally good. Radiation exposures at Pilgrim

continued to be high. Some efforts towards permanent shielding and chemical

decontamination have been utilized with only limited effectiveness. ALARA (As low As is

Reasonably Achievable) planning was not effectively implemented during the design phase

of the Emergency Core cooling System (ECCS) strainer modifications resulting in limited

implementation of exposure reduction techniques. Another weakness was identified in the

ALARA area with respect to the accuracy of work hour estimates and tracking.

Radiological housekeeping was reasonably good; however, access to the residual heat

removal and core spray quadrant areas continued to be adversely affected by the

radiological conditions in these areas. Resolution of radiological problems such as for the

condition of the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) quadrant rooms in the Reactor Building has

been slow.

The solid radwaste processing program generally improved as evident by the inctalleHon of

the liquid radwaste filtration precess as an alternative to the conventional diatomaceous

earth filtration system. Licensee audits of the radwaste area were generally good, however

self assessment of the radwaste program was weak. For example, the periodic review of

offsite radwaste process vendors and shipment verification procedures were not

comprehensive in that activity coverage was weak, informal, and lacked independent

review.

Performance of the environmental monitoring and effluent control programs was excellent.

The emergency preparedness program was effectively implemented. The emergency

response plan and implementing procedures were current cnd were effectively

implemented. The emergency facilities were maintained in a state of readiness. Training

and qualifications of emergency response personnel were kept current. Quality assurance

audits were thorough and complete. A notable accomplishment this period was the

smooth and successful transfer of offsite emergency response reception centers.

The security program was generally wellimplemented. The security training program was

a program strength. Several security program upgrades were made demonstrating very

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

.-

.

6

good management support for this program area. Some performance problems were

attributed to the degraded condition of surveillance video camera equipment, which the

licensee was in the process of addressing.

The fire protection program was effectively implemented and housekeeping was generally

adequate.

The Plant Support area was rated Category 2.-

-

,

u

--

O

,

_ . _ _ _ _

-__

_

_.

. _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ , -

. _ _ - . _ . _ _ . - . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ ___

. . .

s

. , , ,

1

.

.

ENCLOSURE 2

NRC INSPECTION PLAN

PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION

l

OCTOBER 1997 - OCTOBER 1998

.

t

t

Procedure 1

Ti k

. .. ' Date1

Type / Number.-

.. ,

a,.

m

!

CO 82301

Emergency Preparedness Exercise Evaluation -

11/3/97

Tl 2515/109

Engineering MOV Testing - GL 8910

12/8/97

i

CO 37001

Engineering 10 CFR 50,59 Safety Evaluation

1/17/98

)

. . .

CO 93801

Engineering SSFl Focusing on AE issues

1/17/98

~

RI92903

Engineering Followup of AE Inspection

1/17/98

Extemal Occupational Exposure Control & Personal

l

CO 83724

3/23/98

Dosimetry

{.

CO 62706

Maintenance Rule Inspection

4/27/98

.

Solid Radwaste Management & Transportation of Rad

CO 86750

6/22/98

-

Material

i

i

1

--

Type Abbreviations:

L

1

'

CO - Core Inspection Minimum Mandatory NRC Inspection Program (NRC

i

Program Inspections, excepting Resident Core Activities)

i-

RI

Regional Initiative

-

(

Tl

Temporary instruction

-

i

1.

i-

I

i

1

,-

l

!

.

.-

.

. .

..

. .

.

.