ML20202C131
| ML20202C131 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 02/06/1998 |
| From: | Gwynn T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Horn G NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9802120172 | |
| Download: ML20202C131 (39) | |
Text
__
e s >8 "0%
UNITED ST ATES
- t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,,e i-n
{,
RE0 low V
/,f 611 RYAN PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 400 ARLINGTON, TEXAS 760118064 FED - 6 1998 G. R. Hom, Senior Vice President of Energy Supply Nebraska Public Power District 141415th Street Columbus, Nebraska 68601
SUBJECT:
COOPER ENGINEERING FOCUS MANAGEMENT MEETING
Dear Mr. Hom:
This refers to the meeting conducted in the NRC Region IV office on January 30,1998. L'uring that meeting we discussed lessons teamed from the recent NRC inspection of the Cooper Design Basis. We also discussed your plans, under development, for improving engineering performance.
Your discussion of the lessons leamed from the Design Basis inspection provided us a better understanding of the causes and extent of the problems with past modifications, instrument uncertainties, and air operated valves. The overview of your plans to improve engineering performance helped to illuminate your short-term and long-term approaches and provided insight into your understanding of past performance. We found that your discussion expressed an appropriate perspective and that the discussion was very worthwhile.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter will be placed in the NRC's Public Dacument Room.
Should you have any questions concerning this matter, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
Sincerely,
/
yy y
- qu.D p.& W "Th,emas P.'Gwynn, Director
[/
Division of React 8r Projects Docket No.: 50-298 License No.: DPR-46
Enclosures:
- 1. Attendance List
- 2. Licensee Presentation I
l
- h h h ] 'll' 9002120172 980206 PDR ADOCK 05000298
- .J.
P PDR
Nebrcska Public Power District 2-cc w/ enclosures:
John R. McPhail, General Counsel.
Nebraska Public Power District P.O. Box 499 Columbus, Nebraska 68602-0499 P. D. Graham, Vice President of Nuclear Energy Nebraska Publ:>c Power District P.O. Box 98 Brownville, Nebraska 68321 B. L. Houston, Nuclear Licensing and Safety Manager 4
Nebraska Public Power District P.O. Box 98 Brownville, Nebraska 68321 Dr. William D. Leech MidAmerican Energy 907 Walnut Street P.O. Box 657 Des Moines, Iowa 50303-0657 Mr. Ron Stoddard Lincoln Electric System 11th and O Streets Lincoln Nebraska 68508 Randolph Wood, Director Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality P.O. Box 98922 Lincoln, Nebraska 68509-8922 Chairman Nemaha County Board of Comrnissioners Nemaha County Courthouse 1824 N Street Auburn, Nebraska 68305 f
- Nebraska Public Power District Cheryl Rogers, LLRW Program Manager Environmental Protection Section Nebraska Department of Health 301 Centennial Mall, South P.O. Box 95007 -
- Lincoln, Nebraska 68509 5007.
R. A. Kucera, Department Director of Intergovernmental Corsperation
- Department of Natural Resources P,0. Box 176 Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 Kansas Radiation Control Program Director i
__ J
1 Nebraska Public Power District FEB - 6 1998 bec to DCD (IE45) bec distrib. by RIV:
-
- Regional Administrator Resident inspector -
-
- DRP Director --
DRS-PSB
- Branch Chief (DRP/C)
MIS System Branch Chief (DRP/TSS)
- Project Engineer (DRP/C)
- RIV File
- w/o Enclosure 2 L
1 T-t
. DOCUMENT NAME: R:\\_CNS\\CN1-30MS.DRP To receive copy of document, Indicate in box: "C" = Copy without enclosures "E" = Copy wRh enclosures "W" = No copy RIV:PE:DRP/C -
C:DRS/Q,
D:DRP r
CSMarschall;df(tWM EEChifiM TPpwynnjotjd 2/Lf /98 2/ V/98 -
2/4 /98 ff '
OFFICIAL]RECO D COPY -
Q Nebraska Public Power District 4-FFB - 6 1998 bec to DCD (IE45) bec distrib. by RIV:
- Regional Administrator Resident inspector -
- Branch Chief (DRP/C)
MIS System Branch Chief (DRP/TSS)
RIV File
- Project Engineer (DRP/C)
- w/o Enclosure 2 :-
l 1.
1 i
DOCUMENT NAME: R:\\, CNS\\CN130MS.DRP To receive copy of document, ind6cate in box:"C"
- Copy wAhout enclosures "E"
- Copy wah enclosurms *N"
- No copy lRIV:PE:DRP/C C:DRS/Q,l D:DRP
{
lCSMarschall;dfL4M EEChifM TPf3wyn" l2/4 /98 2/ R/98 2/f ci l
OFFICIALYEY 0 COPY
ENCLOSURE 1'
page 1 of 2 CSOPER ENGINEERING FOCUS MEETING ATTENDANCE DATE/ TIME January 30,1990/8:00 a.m.
CONFERENCE Region IV Yraining Classroom LOCATION LICENSEE REPRESENTATIVES NAME (PLEASE PRINT)
ORGANIZATION TITLE
/D 4m Nfk,b Y$
$N W
L m-no su s ur <sy kossaa.nm)
A) PPD 9L REUA Bt UTY' Ed6 K Pc n v e A)Ju.o NPPP Sn Cnrilhtvu 6 I Esser i
.J Gim G/)Jg&
N V<D fFC3 JMT - drsi s ryf iEs & anao crr
- s.. -a K~,ca or]h / nN kb Sr.Yre E k,
(,s S, dt h,Sww NPPb Ac ra,a temca bliuYYousbun Asrrn
/,i n >. < n m4/
/
/
Joauf>rvergewret GPPL)
Summw 3/2AS lolIlion % i.nha/I Me(
6r.
E n.; ; w / - M a / w
ENLLOSURE 1 page 2 of 2 COOPER ENGINEERING FOCUS MEETING ATTENDANCE DATE/ TIME January 30,1998/8:00 a.m.
CONFERENCE Region IV, Training Classroom LOCATION NRC REPRESENTATIVES NAME (PLEASE PRINT)
ORGANIZATION TITLE S
T L 4 f a q r g t>
91.c Sr. 44, %
C, % <gua 9gc_
q_ f,f gwm a
a D
th 5 N
&N4C8 l6I" u,a m J e w..,
a c..
i s'i,
.. ' ' k.
- c. c F.e.
.o...t
.J)v,...
,g,sn I.T llowsl' Nec brey p;y.,p w w,
rzu ra;br, w#
J. N. Huo n vet aor T F 3tetlea s)(2e thk 8mact CL : e+ w.,,,,,,f v
v l
2, Focus Meeting
-- 2 Arlington, Texas
~
a s Architect Engineering Inspection Dan Buman Ken Thomas Jim Gausman e Achieving Engineering Excellence q
Jim Pelletier
^
1
.s
- ,l iil j i' l
- !
i 2
t x
e n
y b
d e
d y
no r
p
)
a s
tr e
o m
r p
e m
n 0
r o
5 r
~
u it u
a s
o S
mn ya h
roiod r
f t
u n
s e
l o
a em f-i r
u c
oq a
f s
e t
slad s
n i
s s
c e
R o
t i
I
(
end P
s it uh n
QQR q
c o
1 a
s eep 6 AA E
t mr t
s CC L
f e8 5
e oS S
r t
62 7
l o
i 3
2 2%yta3 1
E 9
3ao w
4 3d T
T A
e s
e e
)a'
. ~l l
,a j1 3j
,,lI M
,+
+
.;ii l ill:!!l!:
i1i:i
.I{!
--se-ww ii e
Instrument Uncertainty a
e Definition of Issue CNS original design did not explicitly account for the effects of instrument uncertainty.
N zii
-s[
?'
1 3
.y x
L
l
.i s
i
)
i i
l InstrumentUncertainty e Background e
i CNS directly applied tech spec limits into I
- j acceptance criteria
~
j Previously performed uncertainty cales l
3:
- EQ/R.G.1.97 indication equipment (1989) l
-EOP equipment (1990)
^
)]
-Implementation of GE setpoint methodology l
(1992 -1995)
)
l w
-Developed analytical limits document (1997) 2 n
i
/
i
i k'.
$h l
Instrument Uncertainty x
w R e Conclusions s
Instrument uncertainty had been 3#
addressed:
-Automatic initiation
-Operator action points (EOP, PAM, etc.)
Instrument uncertainty needs to be
.P addressed for other plant instrumentation f) '
l
?
i
,i!
, !Ii snt r t
oo r
si t
p o
l d
os p
p r
e u
p e
t t
n u
s u
n) oq s
o y
mWc e
ct o
i t
ef s
t eS i
v c
n s
n l
t eo e
pd i
r a
mn api i
t r
u at s
a d
i l
t s
r u
e s
,i r
oCinfoc c
l e
l s
a o
E mic r
r t
c nRd s
p s
o ayd e s cs n
n c
l i
Rd at nf n
U o
e i
vH en coco zaeiei i
t t
t t
c a (R lad e
i s
ps l
t i
es ese n
Aet r
r u
u s
mutcdqdq e
etan r
d u
e e
i viieed s et e
m v
a v d
mt c
i i
n v odo t
t o
c ed oeb pb r
r u
emA oPCRaUa r
r h
mS t
r s
oI n
C-e I
i ii 1i s
d au d
i!
!)!i!<!
!j!
l!i!
!j
!{l jij'
- }it 7
to r
o o
r f
r s
e i
t s
f y
a l
d a
a s
r ni n
mo r
y a
a e
d t
aidt t
n yi r
ce t
r n
a n
c g
at o
e t
i i
s ae r
el t
c p
vp a
n et e
n t
a r
m i
d t
t o
c o r
r n
c a
e e c t
u e
n p
t e
(
c d
u n
n e
m es eois t
ci c
t c
u n
c m mct s
oc eaief n
n n
r o
oe U
o pd mel pt m
l l
u c amn s Edyt n
i ni e s t
r c
T ng s
a o
ik me tn A
a oinl t
r l
ot e aa ss i
mmh l
r ss id c
v emea s
e e
r r
el u
vesbo u
ph s e d
s s m_i ah nSOc i
t t
vt t
n a u cges eo ee a
u enREmC BRc r
r o
r oL ts n
. C-s I
1 q
i g
y" i
d,
- !fli
,.k l
!)!
ll l
- l l1l
- ii
illi!
8 se u
s s
i g
g n
n i
si s
y si t
ea r
r n
d y
d i
d l
a e
a su m
y o
tr l
a t
u e
e s
p n
c L
emi t
i o
n t
n s
n r
o i
U nu p
c ot f
f r
t s
o o
o sp ee n
ep c cs e
L on nd a
ar m
c d
t t
a er r
f s
ood i
s p
pn u
icimmt a r
_. eMI t
s p
I s
. S n
e I
i
.e s
-4
,N 3 'j
':.d
~;
m d.
, t!ll i!
i!
!:jl l!
ll
!l i',
I
=
l e $
55A
~Ome j
E 6V3 N@
i s o. 5 l
- m e
1 s-w O
'W-3
-s=hoc M
O 8{EB5 i
- O g
'm "
9..
$3 8 i
6-cm.
l G1
- O m
2
+%
ce8
+
i G
c O
e1 oyEo o
l C.
E a2e u.E$
c 1
C %
i O
h:: >.c i
l
.hl:
O l
4 i
Air Operator Overpressure l
v y
i Ie Background x.
Issue raised at D.C. Cook by AE Team
,.%#i Concem was common mode failures 4
3 Full scope of concem not realized by NPPD i
until CNS AE Inspection y
es 4.;{h I
's a
A.
kE 10 e}-
w I
l l
ll1 I
1 1
de de A
if r
i e
l I
e a
d l
iy l
r u
u st q
f e
u r
nf r
i y
s o
aoa l
f cs l
s a
l t
d a se e
n e
t ev i
r e
n n
vi t el c
p m
g sa a
i r
n s
sv o
e
+laan e
r d
i v
v ni t n
s one r
O e
o nev sa t
r a
6 sh r
o r
3et e
o as p
an no l
l t
t i
r a
n o o
no t
o o
r ea7 eisrd) t sr 5r n
i o s e
se3ud t
o epf sd aei p
o os ar vt O
_. e c
el p7 e npan 5ir 8r o
3 a
5 p A o (v u r
c f
S iA e
mi 3;
i
))j l
11 s
l
+
_~
/
G Ct 2
E
- s e
8.
T E To e
w88 2er O
9es c
w
.O c.
h3E
> s>
2 E
8 E
e 8.g E"
e a.
.s o.e a O
< 8 s.:
oON e
a
.h::
o....
<(
e g
i
- - - - - - - ' - " - ' ' " - ' - ' - ' - ' - " ' " ~ ~ -
0 0
@>me O
3 e
c 8
Os u-cE s
o E.c$e s-oe ees 2
g o gr a g_s v)
N
- 0) gj C
.!?
e b 5a v,
$2S!*33 l
O va8*_3-e 8 3 *$ $
83 3
'h O E d=4>ss$
E s
memec 8
C O
_ y.LD v g) a
'E "@ wE E E *0 D
O
@>O f
I I
i N.O 6
(L
,_4
\\i:
,j,l;i!!
l e
4 1
cd nte e
a i
r u
e el p
a n
x v
r u
oe e
it y
e s
u r
r s
l t
a os e
s u
s t
r d
ed l
p e
n u
r mmis t
e r
ea r
e al v
eb y
se l
L od r
s O
p a
y s
ol r
r r
a o nofob ng ro sl k
ai r t
s eot r
a e ed o
a ol h
p r
L t
e mt er o
o c
r p
p id d
u f
oe sh ic o
e n.t O
eGNEw i
p r
S iA s
el,l1 3
rb
-D4 7U i
j x
3 s
g'
.r f.
9 iil<l ilj!
l;j4l:!
- 1 li l;ll i
1 Configuration issues a
n j e Definition of Issue Two issues were recently identified where ij NPPD's preliminary assessment is that the design margin of the plant was reduced.
"t These are the REC filter demineralizer 1
sample valve configuration and the RHR g
Quad Cooler operability requirements.
e
.yI h
15 4-
II11
, )!l1lll r
6 1
e k
s d
u n
n o
u ga nt u
g i
s n
n h
e cl ei io rb t
l vn o
s aa o
etp l
c t
ac n
s S
e e e VdmCs c
mr c
e eCn e
ct o eea s
pusEi ci l
l t
e mdyfi nh m
od os n
a wu u
at Cssoh r
ndm s
c SiEl n
o ei ein s
s nRds i
f i Co mim i
ea tn Eiosb e en n
t t u
Ran a nt o
cicg sdo yi i
i f t s
s e n i
ne i
t di v e uio duMphcWst a
ooad n
sis s
r i
e eldf u
o l
c u e i
u e pop 3 7qm r
g g1 9mCs9 9Elu if k
c9a 9
9/o n
Av s
1 1
o a1 B
C e
3,m h
p" in' j
x 4
4
(
i 1
l, il,i :i llt
Itr S
til 2*
t 8
2 E
O oY Q.
w
.M 3
~
e X,#
m 5
ZcES2e e
c e
oe ebja g
a
~48o>53g s
E 5.c O
a e
eo
=o o
- O c ee g
m
.8 l
c
.O E*SaE ES e
m e
83s Ef Co'o E 3 3,e E
o e 2
CD D y x}2
- =*
,o G
o W
e 2 o "y E ygS 8
u e
e 1
0 C
e oV 6
Ep oe e
eeoa e
e c) e e
s c.2 a e.-c W
a m
e
> 3 0 >ee>o
_E E C
o3 O
o>
O e
w sq a
m;
,;y g.:;
g y
w ev y
sp y
y
4' 4 Configuration issues q s ) e Long Term Corrective Actions - REC i Valves s Si Provide Engineering training on circumstances and importance of this issue ji;j Investigate why this issue was not identified ~ during REC DCD development in late 1995 Review past modifications on risk significant systems Perform SSFl type inspections on two risk 1 significant systems 48
......i. 1 Configuration issues 3 ] e Background - Quad Coolers 1993 - Operations procedures revised lj improperly ~ -Procedure not properly supported by applicable a safety evaluation ~ 1997 - Problem discovered by NPPD a employee through USAR Rebaselining project n 19
t; Configuration issues ij e Completed Corrective Actions RHR Quad Coolers 2l} Verified RHR Quad Coolers operable Operations implemented administrative 4 controls ,e Drafted revised operations procedures to 'j reflect correct requirements z. 'a "i 20 ,7
l Configuration issues ,7 49 ij e Long Term Corrective Actions RHR Quad Coolers l! Provide training on i s importance/ circumstances of this issue $) Investigate whether operations procedures were properly validated during DCD 0 development u )1 I 21 s..
't 4] .c Configuration issues 3 3 e Corrective Actions Taken To improve Configuration Control Since 1993 9 Improved design change process Improved procedure change process
- 2 Continue to take actions to improve our
~ 50.59 process .a ~ :i h 22 ~ ay. m.,
e a Configuration issues g 31 e Lessons USAR Rebaselining project is of value N Design Documents must be explicit Standards for 10CE-R50.59 reviews must I be exacting Need to investigate if REC DCD and other il DCDs are adequate 23
.lIl! i!il ,li:!l! II ; 42 d se e ig m_ e t a_ a r t e_ L_ S s g e n s u r n i n. s s e o o.I e t i n c s.fo e i s. g l f n n e e o E R L ita s l m e a l l t n a r a o i r f d s n e _. o a e i r l v. V P O.C eeees 12.- 4 :. y2 as hq y, 1 ] l .;1 i!!4! , l:1:! iI!, I! ,i!l1
ll{[ ,lt> 1! l' ,(hi 52 g n ir n e g o e r n n i t ei g i .n a8 t e t 9 e n E 9 l e S lef 1 n r 0 P o 3 r a . ig y P e e a g r n u s a l E c n e n a ma u J aM g N J n r r o i v e n i e o-e h o S i c o A C 4+ 4' as $q s :~.
- 1 1
3n ?, ~ ,t E a-( l I
- l;1 l
li !! fl li)
I ll i l li l 6 2 sen ituo r y l i s a n sd e o d s gn n it s n o c na ai 7 Aoh s c t c r i a 9 mt o c 9 aAmimv a a r e eh e 1 T mt et t r r t b r t en o e neT enh mi s t sr mt s r eec ea e og gf i u gh a n c i i t aSn a e vQ ah p i n yMCS a e i tch MK t A4 ee I a 3 a' I l 1
i Engineering Improvement Short Term Actions l 3 ); e improved Plant support e Noticeable change in Engineering presence (1st week) ad e Reduce NRC open items g e Engineering action plan closure 3,vM e A/E inspection j e improved OA and 50.59 quality ,,e, 94 e Integrated Engineering work management (planning, scheduling, and management tools) ij e System Engineering performance improvement 27 r.
l1ll;;lI li w 82 d n a O )t t n C e M n m /8 e et n 1 s lp e 0 s m mm E e tr n i e R oe e d v p v r n o vs a r o pi t f p u c on_ et s e e mt r f o.n r eo nf i i p o e pi. f l emp p i m d amu t mtc.( os r a a r s g c ar A_t o n p g I n r g o e o ep ni r r g mn a p p t in s nm eoic n n e viaf i og oin s r i ir r o ot d it t t c a e e p r d r o r a r eT moe m o u ah Cf dmp a e c pl f i v r nt s/ a e u vi o r s nt e r eios vt s etci v g o __o o l ot OOe a i c s y r r r poM P r h l oe r r u nh mh N CB PEFisPI ES esee eeee ,9 e ,e j ^ x l
..,y .I,I Current Activities r:- e Accelerate & broaden effort 2, 4; e Strategy development f! e Inside & outside help a NPPD "c Industry experts g.a Contractor management support 9; -f h;; M gp -. 29 ~' 1 as
Strategy for Achieving 4 3 Engineering Excellence 1 e Four areas Management effectiveness il Standards for quality performance Engineering staffing & work I! management process Configuration management & I! engineering information infrastructure 3 30 t m .. n
s
- 1 Strategy for Achieving a Engineering Excellence 10, e Key Features That Will Make It Work Strengthened engineering management lij team Performance measurement &
Rij management Managers committed to improving Q performance Strong support by plant & NPPD w. 99" 31 y 1 m
i i Strategy for Achieving Engineering Excellence l 'y e i e e um i i um immme i e m
- e Key Features That Will Make It Work (cont.)
3 Work management process in place High standards / industry benchmarking M The strategy is dynamic Oversight ?i. s 32 ..}}