ML20202C146
| ML20202C146 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zion File:ZionSolutions icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/25/1997 |
| From: | Grant G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Brons J COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9712030270 | |
| Download: ML20202C146 (137) | |
Text
, _ - _ _
pt* "D,
UNITED STATES Q4 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j.,;
b-REGION til E
i 801 WARRENVILLE ROAD l
?,
8 USLE. ILUNOIS 60532-4351 tKwanber 25, 1997 Mr. J. Brons Site Vice President Zion Station Commonweal 0i Edison Company 101 Shiloh Boulevard Zion,IL 60099
SUBJECT:
NRC OVERSIGHT PANEL MEETING
SUMMARY
Dear Mr. Brons:
The NRC Oversight Panel met with Commonwealth Edison and Zion Station management on September 15, October 17, and November 14,1997. These management meetings were open to public observation. Enclosum 1 contains the associated meeting summaries. contains the handouts provided to the NRC Oversight Panel by Commonwealth Edison during the meetings.
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 and its enclosures will be placed in NRC's Public Document Room.
Sina.ely, W
pv Geofr3iy E.' Grant, ctor Division of Reactor Projects Docket No. 50-295 Docket No. 50-304 i,
Enclosures:
- 1. Meeting Summaries
- i. '
- 2. Meeting Handouts
/
See Attached Distribution 1
9712030270 971125 i
yDR ArtOCK 05000295 PDR
+
J. Brons oc w/encis:
. O. Kingsley, Nuclear Generation Group President and Chief Nuclear Officer M. Wallace, Senior Vee President, Corporate Services H. G. Stanley, Vice President PWR Operations Liaison Offmer, NOC BOD D. A. Sager, Vee President, Generation Support D Farrar, Nuclear Regulatory Services Manager
- 1. Johnson, Ucensing Operations Manager Document Control Desk-Licensing R. Starkey, Plant General Manager R. Godley, Regulatory Assurance Supervisor Richard Hubbard Nathan Schloss, Economist Office of the Attomey General Mayor, City of Zion State Liaison Officer State Liaison Officer, Wisconsin Chairman, Illinois Commerce Commission
-m
'l Novmber 25, 1997 Mr. J. Brons Site Veos President Zion Stauon Commonwealth Edison Company 101 Shiloh Boulevard Zion,IL 60000
SUBJECT:
NRC OVERSIGHT PANEL MEETING
SUMMARY
Dear Mr. Bronx The NRC Oversight Panel met with Commonwealth Edison and Zion Station mana0ement m september 15, October 17, and November 14,1997. These management meetings were open to public observation. Enclosure 1 contains the anaMaw mechng summaries.
Enciosure 2 contains the handouts provided to the NRC Oversight Panel by Commonwealth Edison durine the meetinos.
In accordance w6th Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosures will be placed in NRC's Public Document Room.
- Sincersh,
/s/ G. E. Grant Geoffrey E. Grant, Drector Division of Reactor Projects Docket No. 50 295 Docket No. 50-304
Enclosures:
- 1. Meeting Summanos
- 2. Meeting Handouts l
l See Attached Dstnbution DOCUMENT NAME: R:\\LTRS2LIC\\ CECO \\ ZION \\ZIONMET1.171 h
To receive a copy of this docuenent, indicate in the box "C" = Copy without attach /enci "E" = Copy with attach /enci "N" = No copy M
OFFICE Rill' 6
Hill Rill NAME Hills /co 'tCY Vogel b
Grant GECv DATE 11/ Ei /97 11/ 2k /97 11/ 15 lb OFFICIAL RECORD COPY e-
l J. Brons 2-oc w/oncis:
O. Kings;ey, Nuclear Generation Group President and Chief Nuclear Officer M. Wallace, Senior Vme President, Corporate Services H. G. Stanley, Vice President PWR Operations 1.laison Officer, NOC-BOD D. A. Sager, Vice President, Generation Support D. Farrar, Nuclear Regulatory Services Manager
- 1. Johnson, Licensing Operations Manager Document Control Desk-Licensing R. Starkey, Plant General Manager R. Godley, Regulatory Assurance Supervisor Richard Hubbard Nathan Schloss, Economist Office of the Attomey General Mayor, City of Zion State Liaison Officer State Liaison Officer, Wisconsin Chalm.sn, Illinois Commerce Commission Distribution:
Docket File w/encls DRP w/encls OCFO/LFARB w/encls TSS w/encts PUBLIC IE-01 w/encls DRS (2) w/encls A. Beach w/encls Rlli PRR w/encls Deputy RA w/encis RAC1 (E-Mail)
Rill Enf. Coord. w/encls CAA1 (E-Mail)
SRI Zion w/encls DOCDESK (E-Mail)
Project Mgr., NRR w/oncis F. Miraglia, NRR w/encls L. Gerke, OCA w/encls G. Tracy, EDO w/encls S. Collins, NRR w/encls R. Zimmerman, w/encls E. Adensam, NRR w/encls
)
i
Fublic Meeting Summados NRC Oversight Panel for Zion Station September 15.1997, Manenement Meetina Summary:
The licensee presented information contained in the handout in Enclosure 2. During the licensee's presemation, the licensee provided clarification in response to NRC's questions and comments. Participants extensively discussed the Restart Schedule for Unit 2 and planned milestones including the Operational Readiness Demonstration.
The licensee also discussed equipment configuration control concerns, corrective actions implemented and planned to improve operator performance, status of several technical issues identified in Confirmatory Action Letter Rlil-97 002, Supplement B, dated June 6,1997, and other engineering issues to be addressed prior to startup.
Meeting Attendees:
Nuclear _ Regulatory _ Commission G. Grant, Director, Division of Reactor Projects, Region 111 R. Capra, Director, Project Directorate 1112, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation M. Dapas, Acting Deputy Direc*or, Division of Reactor Projects, Region 111 A. M. Stone, Acting Chief, Divis.on of Reactor Projects Branch 2, Region 111 E. Cobey, Acting Senior Resident inspector, Region til Z. Falevits, Reactor Engineer, Realon til L. Rossbach, Project Manager, rjffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Commonwesith Edison J. Brona Site Vice President, Zion R. Starkey, Plant General Manager, Zion L Waldinger, Nuclear Oversight Manager, Comed R. Zyduck, Director, Site Quality Verification, Zion T. Luke, Engineering Manager, Zion T. O'Connor, Restart Manager, Zion R. Godley, Regulatory Assurance Manager, Zion F. Higgins, Work Control Manager, Zion L. Kelley, Training Manager, Xion M. Schimmel, Unit 2 Maintenance Manager, Zion L. Holden, Nuclear Ucensing Administrator, Zion L. Kelley, Training Manager, Zion B. Kugelberg, Zion Communications Director, Comed G. Galanis, Supervisor, Electrical Design Englneering, Zion J. Schrage, Wholesale Marketing Supply Director, Comed D. Farrar Regulatory Affairs, Comed C. Winters, Shift Operations Supervisor, Zion
_ _ _ _ _ _ _.. _.__.. _. _,.- _ _ -. _.- _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _.._ _ _ ____._.~_ _ _
October 17.1997. Manaaement Meetina Sunimary:
The lloonsee provided the NRC Oversight Panel with a handout (Enclosure 2) and discussed the information contained in the handout during the meeting. The riiamaa%
was focused on the tentative restart schedule, the status of selected engineering issues, j
the licensee's current assessment of operator performance, and the plans for the upcoming Operational Readiness Demonstration. During the licensee's presentation, the licensee addressed NRC questions and comments.
The licensee indicated that operator performance was generally meeting management's expectations; however, continued improvement was still needed as demonstrated by the service water event on October 12, igg 7. The operations department also continued to be chd': -;;+1 by operating procedural deficiencies and out-of-servios errors, in addition, the corrective actions in the area of configuration control were ongoing and would be completed prior to restart of Unit 2. The NRC staff noted that the licensee's charaderization of operator performance was mose consistent with the NRC staff's current assessment than in previous meetings.
Meeting Attendees:
Nuclear Reaulatory Commission A. Beach, Regional Administrator, Region lil R. Capra, Director, Project Directorate lil-2, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation M. Depas, Acting Deputy Director, Division of Reactor Projects, Region lli A. Vogel, Acting Chief, Branch 2, Division of Reactor Projects, Region til E. Cobey, Acting Senior Resident inspector, Division of Reactor Projects, Region lil D. Smith, Resident inspector, Division of Reactor Projec's, Region til C. Shirald, Project Manager, Project Directorate lll-2, Omco of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l-Commonwealth Edison G. Stanley, Vice President of Pressurized Water Reactor Operations, Comed J. Brons, Site Vice President, Zion R. Starkey, Station Manager, Zion T. Luke, Engineering Manager, Zion D. Bump, Restart Manager, Zion R. Godley, Regulatory Assurance Manager, Zion T. O' Conner, Operations Manager, Zion R. Zyduck, Site Quality Verification Manager, Zion K. Dickerson, Executive Assistant to the Site Vice President, Zion 2
l
- = _.. - _. - - -
i November 14,1997. Manaaement Meetina Summary:
The licensee provided the NRC Oversight Panel with a handout (Enclosurw 2) and discussed the information contained in the handout during the meeting. The discussion was focused on the chined environment at the zion station, the restart schedule, operational performance, quahty and safety assessment offectiveness, the corrective action program, and technical issues. During the heensee's presentation, the imensee addressed NRC questions and comments.
During the discussion, the licensee indicated that followmg with respect to improvement schons and current plant performance:
Surveys conducted by the licensee indicated that the perceived " chilling offect" was mainly confined to operations personnel. These survey results also indicated that actions taken by the licensee were resulting in substantial progress in pierrei,,g a
" wholesome safety environment."
With respect to observations to-date during the Operational Readmess Demonstration, personnel generally met the standards. Some weaknesses had been observed in three-way communications and use of annunciator response procedures. A shift manager and unit supervisor failed the simulator portion of the Demonstration because they didn't respond property to a turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump trip during a plant startup. Greater time intervals were being achieved between station error-free clock resets and several significant evolutions had been conducted without incident. The new oul-of-service plan had been in place for 3 to 4 weeks and no out-of-service issues had since been identifitxi.
There was no scheduling pressure to restart Zion Station by any parbcular date.
However, there was a need for further discussion with the NRC regarding the possibility of performing plant heatup prior to final restart approval. Plant heatup would be considered part of the Operational Readiness Demonstration and reactor criticality would not be accomplished until after final restart approval.
The licensee is currently evaluating the staffing impact of an issue involving an incorrect interpretation of requirements which resulted in several senior reactor operators and reactor operators being granted licenses without having performed the requisite number of reactivity manipulations.
Past weaknesses were apparent in the Quality and Gafety Assessment organization; however more recently, increased effectiveness has been demonstrated. The licensee described severalissues raised by the Quality and Safety Assessment organization to support this conclusion.
During the discussion, the NRC staff communicated the following concems:
The licensee's revised startup schedule did not provide as much time for completion of overview functions including NRC inspection. The licensee's staff responded that many of the planned oversight reviews were currently ongoing and 3
i
. m 4..,.,,,
_,.m.
l the planned restart date would be extended, if necessary, to complete restart edivities. The licensee's staff also irxhcated that they must satisfy several conditions before startup including ensuring a safety conscious work environment, having a conective adion program in place, and determining that engineering, maintenanos, and radiabon protection persormel could work together to support operations. The licensee's staff indicated that once they are satisfled with their progress, they would inform the NRC, allowine sufficient lead time for the NRC to perform a planned operational Readiness inspection.
The licensee's current process would require problem identification forms be
+
gene,d for general deficiencies observed so far in the Operational Roadness Demonstration. Although these were observed at least a week before, no corresponding problem identification forms had been initiated. The licensee's staff indicsted that the problem identification forms would be written and factored into the assessmerd for the Demonstration.
The licensee had indicated that the Quanty and Safety Assessment organization
+
had identified several deficiencies in implementation of the licensee's Recovery Plan such as different lists of startup issues that did not match and issues that were not closed but indicated as closed in plan tracking. The NRC staff pointed out that some of these concems were similar to previous concems raised by the NRC and discussed with the licensee regarding plan implementation and tracking. While it was commendable that the licensee's Quality and Safety Assessment organization subsequently looked into the concems and confirmed problems, the NRC staff j
expressed concem that these types of issues would surface this late into Recovery Plan implementation.
The NRC staff also expressed concem regardmg the licensee's startup issue
+
closeout process with respect to the licensee's closeout affirmations and Zion Review Panel. Specifically, in response to NRC staff questions, the licensee indicated that Recovery Plan issues were being approved as closed out by the Zion Review Panel but a punch list (supplementary tracking list) had been created for 3
actions that were not yet complete. The licensee indicated that closeout of these punch list actions would need to be approved later by the Zion Review Panel. This punch list process was not consistent with the NRC staff's understanding gained i
from previous meetings with the licensee. While the NRC staff did not necessarily have a problem with the hcensee's use of a punch list, they were concemed if issues were portrayed to the NRC staff as complete when some associated actions were still open. Heavy reliance on a pench list could make most startup issues appear closed when in reality significant work still remained. This situation could complicate licensee and NRC oversight efforts just before startup. Confidence of the NRC staff in the licenses's restart approval process was described as an important aspect in gaining NRC staff approval for restart.-
+
TM'L.isse discussed several improvement initiatives with respect to the corrective action program. The NRC staff communicated the need to focus discussion on the effectiveaess of these efforts during the next meeting in which the corrective action program is a topic.
4 i
The NRC staff and the licensee had not yet reached agreement on the proposed solution to two technical issues referenced in the June 6,1997, confirmatory action letter, specificaly, the issues involving the auxiliary building differential pressure and main steam line pressure transmitters. The NRC staff indicated the need for increased communication between the NRC and the licensee to resolve these issues.
The NRC staff expressed concem regarding recent evidence of continued problems with zebra mussel fouling of the service water system and the need for further discussion regarding this issue.
Meeting Attendees:
Nuclear Reoulatory Commission A. Beach, Regional Administrator, Region 111 G. Grant, Director, Division of Reactor Projects, Region 111 R Capra, Director, Project Directorate ill-2, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation M. Depas Acting Deputy Director Division of Reactor Projects, Region lli M. Leach, Chief, Operating Licensing Branch, Region ill D. Hills, Project Engineer, Region lli E. Cobey, Acting Senior Resident inspector, Division of Reactor Projects, Region lli D. Smith, Resident inspector, Division of Reactor Projects, Region lli J. Strasma, Senior Public Affairs Officer, Rag'on 111 L Rossbach, Project Manager, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Z. Falevits, Reactor Engineer, Region ill S. Orth, Radiation Protection Inspector, Region til Commonwealth E4 liga O. Kingsley, Chief Nuclear Officer, Comed G. Stanley, Vice-President, Pressurtzed Water Reactors, Comed J. Brons, Site Vice-President, Zion R. Starkey, Station Manager, Zion T. O' Conner, Operations Manager, Zion R. Godley, Regulatory Assurance Manager, Zion E. Katzman, Radiation Protection Manager, Zion D. Bump, Restart Manager, Zion T. Luke, Engineering Manager, Zion D. Cooper, NOD Corrective Actions Manager, Comed R. Zyduck, Sito Quality Verification Manager, Zion J. Bailey, Restart Manager, LaSalle M. Bittman, Assistant Shift Operations Supervisor, Zion T. Marini, Q&SA Audit Supervisor, Zion R. Jelsy, Q&SA AC Supervisor, Zion T. Broccolo, Corporate Assessment, Comed W. Stone, Regulatory Assurance-Compliance, Comed B. Kugelberg, Communications, ComZd S. Mahler, Engineering, Comed B. Lane, Maintenance, Comed 5
D. Evans, NOC Usson, Comed M. Jesse, Operations Staff, Zion C. LeStarge, Acting Chief Steward Radiation Protection, Zion
- 8. Milani, Chief Steward Local 15, Zion L Holden, Zion Nuclear Ucensing Administrator, Comed A. Tattersall, Restart, Zion G. Wald, Corporate Communications, Comed 6
Commonwealth Edison Management Meeting Handouts 5
pF
l
_ -=_
NRC Public Briefing September 15,1997 o,,-
~
AGENDA
.=,.: ;,
. Restart Schedule Overview D. Bump e Operations T. O'Connor e Engineering T. Luke e Corrective Action R. Gocley e Demonstration Restart Criteria R. Star <ey e Closing Comments J. Brons
j f
i i
9 8
6 3
3 2
2 I
P 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 2
t D
r 5
5 4
4 4
3 3
3 3
3 2
2 1
0 0
4 9
7 9
5 7
6 c
1 0
g s
2 7
6 3
4 1
7 0
6 7
4 rec
.n T t
U as a
s r
k M
c w
W A
i N
s P
s o
A o
E.
T D
s s.
o P
88 w
w_.
P s
=
v c
i p
w 0
o o
u y
T m
o m
m m
v i
p e
m o
e 0
o, (E
(A r
m e
a a P
v f
3 a
n a
2 E
u t.-
D.
X n
n m A
a a
t a
a s
e n
=
A P
R a
m a
A
.P a
ss a
ai e
e s
s m
P a
w
=
w n
m E
s s
a n
T e
s5 m
e M
d 1
a a
1 e
n W
S L
n a
a o
e A*
~
H A
^
.a a
n E
n 1-r T
8 G
w e
m a
iA A
0 0
w a
r n
.T e
s a
e S
r G
m o
R r
.t P
d n
T
.a i
~
(A t
r e
s i
o a
2 e
m w
e y
N g
9 c.
c P
e.
s e
s y
L a
A
.T A
a u
S t
.a
+
L
)a a
=
k t
w z
m A
L
.a e
s a
e o
T.
a e
n e
s
^
m.
w m
n n
P r
a a
o s
i
.n w
t a
O r
s a
er re o.
=
T a
.n o
WWT w
w=
=
c s
Task N[@#
Dur 7
a t
i 2
t 2
i s
s 3
s S
r s
r i
- o s
s 2
w m
1 8'
a 2
r m
w, w
e w
w w
d d
d d
d d
a d
s a
a a
e a
e s
a r
4 a
s s
o o
e 4
s o
s a
p
@fg t
c c
i s
u S
t i
1 s
a e
i s
t i
7 w
s f
2 w
s, t
a r
J7 t
a ei n
m m w
i M
i w
2 7
a n
t r
s r
r c
w 2
a e
s, w
3 i
s t
n w
n s
s i
0 a
o a
s 9
r n
e n
s v
r s
r w
w s
u s
t e
e s
s s
s e
e t
7 7
r r
r 7
7 s
r 7
7 7
s 7
7
?
r 7
7 R S M NN tr i
ose F
d h
i W
i s
t s
s 1
1 s
t i
1 t
i U
u i
w a
s e
w w
w w
v t
3 t
w o
2 r
s f
s 2
a i
i i
1 2
J a
r in 1
1 n
ri re 3
0 w
m, r
m u
r r
2 i
2 p
Y
/
r e
2 n
2 a
s a
2 h
w w w
w e
T 7
M v
i w
a e
r s
s 9
8 e
e m
i
/s s
e s
s w
o e
s, a
7 y
r r
r 7
7 7
r t
r 7
r 7
7 7
7 7
7 s
l k
24 ll 3
1 k
l S
7 e
lp te 1
4 m
l ber 2
1 l
2 l
8 l
p R R o o o 5
n a
n e e e l
O 1
d d
d c
0 1
/
t u U U p
p p
0 2
o 2
l be p M C t
al h*f 9
r 1
r pset c U
o E
l n
T
/
2 0
0 6
e a 2
ll s
3 k
2 I
mQ/V
/
l N
f,/
J l
e 1
9 ov 1
/
m g/
H2 0
1 b
- l l
6 e
1 i
1 1
l r
/
1 1
1 f
/
l g
1
/
1 f
2 1
1 8
f 1
1 3
d 1
B ll 1
/
3 26 0
p l
2
/3 7
D l
ece 1
m 4
l ber 2
1 1
3 l
2 P
2 l
M 8
l i
l)l jj1 ll1Il lI\\jlj i
11 l
lll
r.
P 1
1 1
1 C
r 6
5 5
5 o
0 4
3 2
pc t.
Ta U
s k
M u
M no N T
es od d
c a T
N' e
o m 2
2 D
c e R
O e
o S
E N
pe e
S i
n p
T m
d t
e E
e e
A d
m R
A 5
b T
c eR N
r e
a
,9 v m
e e
1 9o A
9n s
7 a
0 a
ste y
P C.
r o
4 g
e
..I r
ss Task V
D 4
?
ur 8
a t
2 h
M 5*
0 m
0 h
8 4
f f/f S
g t
1 a
d[
1 2
2 1
1 r
/
t N
m t
7 9
S 7
T 7
?
R S Mu rra
- F n
i a
ni U
r 1
G m
2 1
s p
y n
h 1
P T
M M
a a
g s
T 7
7 7
e k
2 24
' ll 3
1 l
S 7
e l
p te 1
4 mb l
er 2
1 l
2 l
8 R R l
o o 5
G p
e e d
d l
Oc 1
U U 2
o t
p p
l b
P M e
r 1
r o
d g
e 9
s re o l
t s
n 2
s 6
e *
' ll 2
NO l
N 9
ov l
e m
1 b
6 e
l r
23 1
2
' ll l4 30
['
j,.
7 D
3 e
l ce 1
1 4
m 2
l b
/
e 1
r 5
2 1
1 3
l 2
P 2 l M
8
Operations Department Performance e OPERATOR PERFORMANCE Control Room Performance Field Performance l
Configuration Control l
j i
l DepartmentalImprovement Actions
..~
i J
l e Focus on individual roles, responsibilities and expectations l
l Realignment of operations 4
j e Operations sets the standard for i
e l
performance l
l I
m
,,,m
,,n,.
,-- --,,, -..,n
DepartmentalImprovement Actions
-- s2 l
e Operations, intelligence in work l
planning-e One-on-one meetings with Shift l
Managers.
4 e Operations Senior Leadership l
involvement in shift oversight.
e Change the threshold of the i
departmental Event Free Clock.
DepartmentalImprovement l
Actions
)
m=-
e Engaging the workforce.
1 a Develop and administer strona self-l assessment methodologies.
l e Commitment management.
l e Operation's arocedures.
f i
l c
[
l i
i l
Progress on CAL Issue.s
-=
+
i j
e Aux. Bldg. Ventilation System Delta-P j
Performed test -- Negative Pressure
~
Achieved in Pump Rooms 1
No unfiltered release consistent with l
l Design Basis requirements Physical changes will be made to increase i
delta-P f
Will meet with NRR at their convenience I
l m
r-N W
i Progress on CAT Issues
_m
,m m l
e Containment Coatings l
RAI signed 9/5 l
Requested meeting for the week of 9/22 i
l e DC Control Power to Sa"ety-Related Breakers l
Design issued
.i
l Progress on CAL Issues
=
... - ; ~
a t :: +.
mmw.-s
\\
i i
I l
e DC Load Shedding Profile Complete i
i e Appendix R concerns with the Diesel i
Generator HVAC
~i Design Issued L
l I
r
')
i I
i Progress on CAT Issues l
e i
y -+ y..w s ' '. ; -<
s l
I i
e Instrument loop accuracy and i
qualification of Main Steam line pressure transmitters and associated I
cabling.
]
l Design Issued, Installation complete I
i l
Resolving the issue associated with cable routing and the Main Steam line break jet l
impingement and pipe whip.
t
j I
Progress on CAL Issues i-+
A C ".7.12C2iI
~ f C17fi L i
e Air Filters conta..ining alum.inum in Vontainment Complete 3
i i.
1 i
l l
4 I
m m
I I
l Other Engineering Issues
=
?--
l l
e IWE/lWL Relief Request i
Letter issued 9/3 l
e SG Tube Rupture Response Time 4
l Westinghouse results allow 50 minutes
)
i l
This bounds simulator timing e GL 96-C1 i
4 Review is being completed to support TSIP and Unit 2 Restart i
l i
l l
l Other Engineering Issues
==(
. g=n...
l e Thermo ag i
Withdrew Exemation I
h Designs issued 4
1 e VT-2 Head Bolting Relief Request l
Relief request submitted 8/13
i Other Engineering Issues j
l e Si flow for Small Break LOCA j
Preparing talking points for further i
l discussion with NRi1 l
e Westinghouse Transmitter Drift {Part 21}
l No impact to Zion (Rosemourit Transmitters)
Expanding review to other transmitters (Fisher Porter) l i
i i
4 i
1 Other Engineering Issues l
e Iso Phase Bus Shorting Plate l
Modification l
Installation Complete i,
e GL 96-06 RAI response to NRC drafted and in review 1
i l
e NUREG 0737 II.D.1 l PORVs and PSVs)
Letter issued 8/29 i
i i
i i
i i
4
... - ~
l i
Other Engineering Issues f
e Containment Spray Pump Diesel Issues Reviewing past performance l
Include results with the System Affirmation e Emergency Diesel Generator Reliability Reviewing past performance include results with the System Affirmation 1
I I
1
i Other Engineering Issues i
)
]
= Containment Spray NaOH pH j
Westinghouse evaluation in process Test to set valve position l
e Service Water System Corrective Action for l
Maintain adequate chlorination Clean / replace pump cooling water supply lines 1
i increased PM frequency for the cleaning of the 2B EDG lube oil heat exchanger from 9 to 3 months.
i I
l
)
l Corrective Action Program
. _ _ _ m.= 3 1
]
Historical Issues
=
l Root Cause Quality c
{
Industry Operating Experience Reviews l
Implementation of Corrective Actions 4
l Repeat Events i
l l
l l
Corrective Action Program
=;
,, = -
i 4
l l
= Historical Issue Causes Senior Management involvement i
Line Organization Ownership i
I t
i Accountability of Line Organization 1
l C/A Program Improvements i
- _ =
i i
Corrective Actions Organization Standardized Process
- Corrective Actions Review Board
- Condition Review Group i
1 I,
i i
i i
l
}
C/A Program Improvements 4
s.
' 2MTZ.T.21 2:L T _"** * %l'. 4.
as
)
i I
4
)
l Operational Review Project i
l Effectiveness Review Project Increased Accountabiity l
1 i
1
)
)
l I
i OPEX Review Project
,m_ ___
Purpose:
i i
-5 Year industry Operating Experience Review I
- Determine Adequacy of Review and i
Applicability to Startup i
Scope:
- NRC Documents, Root Cause Investigations /LERs, INPO SOER/SERs I
)
OPEX Review Results
=.lR3"52,r:=!22
' 2 US'12M - n -
i e Approximately 4400 items reviewed 1
j e 514 Items identified as Potential Pestart issues 4
- Identified NTS Closure Standards inadequate l
1
-NTS ZAP Revised to improve Commitment Closure Process l
- Found OPEX Process Not Well implemented
-Assigned Full Time OPEX Coordinator i
-Imalemented NSWP for OPEX i
4 i
i Effectiveness Review Project m. -... - - - - ~ T r?_2a-varh : s i
Perform Effectiveness Reviews on 149 Documents (1995-1997) 1995 ER Results:
l 24 of 49 Documents had > 1 Ineffective CA's
- 60 NTS Action items to be de-opened on issues Including: OOS, FME, Operator Standards, PM Program, S1 Pump, EDG Problems, RAM Control, 1
FWP Testing i
l l
l l
9 l
Improvements Indications
)
.n
- - ' - -wri. C '
yrgy High CARB Rejeci: Rate
-Indicates CARB Standards are i
5 i
Increasing j
-Sending Expectations to Line 1
l High CRG Adjustment Rate
-# of RCI's and ACE's Controlled
-Sending Expectations to ESC l
CRG identifying More Trend P3F's c
{
I_._._-_,_
l
Corrective Action Process I si i o -i. ar e4 I var suoervnor as l stutt uanager ei Revew for plant identfy Problem PtF Indsaten Supervesor Review anpact aio l Rt Cause lavest a io l PORC/CARB ais l Root Cause Root Cause Revewf p
investgatons Approvat I
A ir s aei ESC /Sr Lage ri en i Superv sor anl Dept Head Assgn sqqsfonce leve I
Apparent Cause Apparent Cause m
m and w*vestgaton Evaluatens RevewiApproval m
issue ceses'utoneer fo-Treads T
\\*
- l
/
Petforrn annua 6seJ assessinent Pf' W precoes a % secmars
710N STAT 10N Ci6 - Number o 'PIFs Written j
l M.f 3
Definition: The nurnber of PIFs wnsten by the site.
=i 5133 l
C M.
0 i
K 4132 C
Action Levef: Trend for 6 months to establish 3 4000 bMw ph to *% cmeh to j
i Analysie:
5 M-
~
The total number of PtFs wntten per month site-wide w
O has rerna.ned at an averace of -420/rnonth for the
)
Qg.
first eight rnonths of 1997. TNs rate of production r
4 4J protected to yield in excess of 6000 PlFs by yeae E
end 1997. TNs is consis:ent with Zion's Nstorical 3
performance whach shows the nurnber of PIFs z
1000-wntten increased by 1000 from year to year.
4ao ss2 501 4a7 4ss 503 i
i 0-s a
m n
=
=
a.
- a. e' 1
i e
e i
M,
,E t
b E
3-7 d
i o
m a
-c s
c o
r i
E
- Plfs WRITTEN BTOTAL PtFs WUTTEN YTD i
1 t
i
=
l 29 l
l r
3 i
i Zion PIFs Written by Department 2500 /
i
%e' l
l l
1500 /
f
[B Operations l
5 Maintenance' i
1000-/ '?
O Engineering
/3 1
i l
D Other 500-/.
J :_
- .r -
j l
0-M 'E 4%
1996 1997 Pace l
1 i
l.
I e
j
=
r Department Self-Identification Ratio i
periaision: The siac aserage of the rasa) of Pil s caned and
-rsten by a depar1 ment daid:d by the number of Pli s l
/ Apartment Sc//-/,icmi/icalmn Ratia
-y a *c-uneni i> 6*n*d - me c 'ca enganuatum.
l
%Icasuremness StasJard: >0$ A use ratulef G 5 i
i 6 Ames that on ascrare. sac 41 -cu scif-idersify half j
0.6, e ec.,,, p,e 1
l j... _............ _... _ _. _......... _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _. _. _... _
a 4batuwes and illamtenance laggmg industr) 5cif-(
g 0.4 /
i&nur.cm.m race.
t
~
t j
j 0.3 /
i A
j I
a 0.1 /-
~
--~
~
0 as,.w er z==
o.
tasm.
ch c==.
c
,.r..
No Data Available
=
l o==
o..
i 1996 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN 'JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BWD 0.28 0.30 0.30 l
i 8YR 0.29 0.32 0.44 0.33 0.29 0.31 0.28 0.38 0.20 i
ZIN 0.41 0,30 0.35 0.38 0.43 0 51 0 42 0 43 0.47 j
DRS 0.36 0.33 0.47 0.33 0 32 0 30 0.23 0.18 g
stabon depastments are ser aser# eg thew f
LAS O 31 0 35 0.32 0.38 0 23 0 26 prot.lerns by wribng PIFs ori themsehes versus 4
cmer depastments andmg there and wrerg ODC O 42 O 59 0 49 PtFs
{
The expectatori e inat departments shouks ser-d COR C.3 6 0 30 0.45 ases#y at least 50% cf ther own precerns l
I
_. _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _. _ ~ _... -.,.. - _. _ _. -... - _...., _ _. _
, _.,..,,,. _. =.,... _..., -.
RCA Threshold i
i i
Definitica: The ratio of U R root cause regunts to are l
l number of root cause reports from a!! murces R( '. I '! hn whoM
,u as i.u as. soihe, acas Measuerment Sasadard: 0 I tu 0 4 0 l is the average for top performing seses with a km number of IJ Rs/ year. 0 4 is the average f*4 km to medium 0.45, r perftemers I
0.4./
A 1 sis:
3 0.35./
5 Li a s in August cornp. ired io a in Jusy and o in suiw p
resulted in increased RCA ThredmAt j M5-
-Y
- F'#'.wming appe pr ate number of etwa cause
/
g mvestigataans.
l C
0.2./
- E 1
N 0.15-/
0.1 -/
N
~
0.05./
~
~
0.d C
i*
m.
e eur men o =.
sasene aneca c.====
- = No Data Available o==
mv..,=o.=
1996 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BWD 0.12 0
0 0
0.05 0.18 0 25 0
BYR 0.11 0.06 0.23 0.06 0
0.55 0.11 0
0 08 ZIN 0.21 0 20 0.30 0 29 0.14 0
0,13 0.33
]
What is this hidicator?
DRS 0.15 0 21 0.50 0.38 0.30 0.18 0 33 0
This ww en whether a m is pedorming too rnany or too few root cause LAS 0.25 0.11 0.50 0 08 0.44 0.44 0.33 0 24 0.33 reports A value of <0 4 sndrates stabcns wath hver LER rusreers rnay be perforrrmg too
- "# # **"** * *".120 reports / year to QDC 0.11 0.20 0.32 0.37 0 40 0.55 0,42 Stations should perform 100 COR 0
0 0
I i
I
.w"
3 5
i t
Average # Days to Complete RCRs r
]
DeEmision: The ascrage ausnher of day 5 frunn the tune a Pif' 1
is urinen tsail final approe d of the asum:iated mot
- cacw
.l FL *1't it'c
- i / A IJ N ls I ( ) 7/1// ?[t'l( * ((( ((t reput b WI reporu cimed during the aiondt [ note: trenJ roos cause arports are act included in th2s calculmion) i i
&.f r
Measuresnest Mandard: < 30 days j
{ 70 '
l
- so. '
Anahsis:
i so /
j
-see strenpher.ing the pracss e control nx4 canc.mc dac 40 /
l 30 /
Z._
Z__ '
l=
Z_ _
Z_
j u
l j 20
/
i
?
I l
[ 10 /
~
l l
2 l
l 0 H.-
3 2,
t ac c
J j
j o==
o..
I i
= No Data Avattable t
]
1996 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV OEC BWD 37 30 31 32 31 31 29 35 j
BYR 54 50 55 50 59 37 53 43 33 i'
j ZIN 147 68 53 65 73 70 75 51 i
i DRS 39 43 55 35 40 36 40 49 I
l LAS 61 154 77 61 66 72 95 41 1
QDC 40 46 42 40 32 37 62 J
2 t
COR NA NA l
I Rool: Cause Report Approval Rate Definition: He perccniage of root cause reports accepted by the station's multi-disciplined resicw process l CARil.
"O
A f'l'l^ffill!l$tifL' l$t4'{(till%'l{L'}'i'!*/
f esdudes grammar or minor enhancements I 1
90-/
E
^
f80 /
Anai} sis:
p CARil irr.; temented in mid June 80 imprme root causc reput quaf4 l 60 /
o j
o
=
z o
us wc c-j I o sees a v,so com
- = No Data Available f
1976 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BWD 100 100 100 100 100 94 100 71 1CO
)
BYR l
ZIN 63 67 69 l
DRS 84 57 80 76 88 83 92 78 LAS 60 33 83 40 75 67 67 54
{
1 QDC 67 60 64 NA 0
0 COR l
Average Days to Complete Corrective Actions l
Definition: The ascrage number of days from, hen a root cause report is approscJ until the rciated NI S item (s) is cl UtTt1,18J' [)(l13 /d J ( f )//// 7[('It ' (,r 11 TCt 'lIIi ' ; b */ /s 1/ h completed [ includes NTS items closed durmg the nonth with the dac ty pes = 100 (NOV). I80 (Li RL I81 (St R). 200 (RCR L 201 ( ACEL 230 (TIR). and 315 (SQV) l 350.-
300/
Si,as rem,,t sta.dard: < 90 Days 1 250 '
Analysis:
Site has backlog of old ( >3 years) correctise actions resulting f150.
in high ascrage age and c)clical trend I
y
$ 100 /
0
. awc c....
e, e,
w o.
t.a I
I No Data Available
=
NOV l DEC 1996 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT BWD 171
- 54 147 119 124 137 154 111 BYR 171 153 107 149 82 97 115 113 141 Ziu 314 128 J39 121 196 181 85 128 168 DRS 90 73 73 95 76 94 107 90 l
LAS 92 90 57 171 199 205 195 187 183 QDC 126 167 133 124 COR NA 30 162 I
l PW Due Corrective Actions Definition: NOD Performance Indicator. The number of past due correctise actions (NOVs. Pil s, t.E'Rs and CARS) that ment oscrdue at any point dunng the month. l includes NIS
/8:q.(',fjjgg */t,. ' [g f /, f ;jS items with the.bc t) pes = 100 (NOV) 180 (l.1 R L 181 (SER).
200(RCRL 230(TIR) and 315 (SQV)l 250 /
Messurresent Sesadsrd: < 15 per quarter E
200 /
$1E0/
Acwuntability sneasures taken since May hate proven j
efTective in reducing past due correctis e actions.
g 2 100/
3 0;
]
l sv.
o..
- = No Data Available 1996 JAN FEB
%I A R APR
%I A Y J lf N J U I, A t! G SEP OCT NOV DEC I
O I
8% D BVR 5
1 2
1 0
9 3
C I
53 48 41 37 24 2
4 3
ZIN I
O O
O DRS 3
7 2
1 0
LA S 21 6
0 0
0 QDC 2
9 4
CDR f
~
Corrective Action Effectiveness l
Definition: The perccrdage of eficctisc corrective actkm; based upm chwed correctisc actam resicws bt 1/T('LT/[IU. f('/[r til ['.//t T// M ' lit'A \\
- resicwed correctisc acisms deactmined cffective /
8 resics.cd corrective actkm ucasurement standard: > 90%
g"-
100 /
90/
d Analysis:
E
$ 70./
~
Pictious site practice was to perform efTectiseness,ctiews Ej 60 /
cortectiscay in batches j 50 /
g 7
E
~~
~
g
?,3 J 20./ t 10 /
l I
Q.J M
_Z a
e-e sp z
Oe.s..
4as.a.
on e cm..
l l
onu a v,
o..
- = No Data Available 1994 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC BWD 78 88 100 80 83 83 100 89 BYR 50 100 100 71 75 100 80 ZIN 50 33 None 62
$6 42 P art DRS 88 85 87 62 65 64 74 100 100 100 6AS 1
I QDC ka=*
100 Noa*
100 Noes 100 100 130 P e rf P e rf P e rf.
COR NA NA
e m
i "b
l Repeat Events Definition: An NOD Performance Indica:or. The nuc-ber of significant esents during the past erxeth whose rtud cause
((C/7C(// [;.li*/JlN insestigation reports indicate one or mcue of the same root cause as for a significant esent that occurred during the presinus 24 calendar mteths.
Measurement Standard: < 10'& # of Significant Events 100/
Anal} sis:
^
hy.f Site perfonning cfTcctiveness resiews of 1996 and 1997
=
3 correctise actions to identify pressous esents that have the CO/
potential of recurring.
3 t
40/~
~
20/
]_
1 p
0M o
]
l oum a v..rea c..
No Data Available
=
1995 JAN FEB MAR APR M AY ! JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC a
2 3
0 1
1 BWD 15 1
BYR 1
0 2
1 0
0 1
0 ZIN 57
2 4
4 3
to 1
0 2
DRS 113 2
6 7
1 0
0 0
LAS 26 1
1 1
3 0
1 1
1 QDC 3
0 1
1 1
1 0
1 g
COR 0
0 0
I x
e OPERATION AL DEMONSTRATION RESTART CRITERIA (All criteria will be met of clearly trending is support of the start up date. The IRP and SVP wdl review and approve esceptions individually and in aggregate to insure no impact on Operation's abiHty to demonstrate readlaess.)
PLANT EQUIPMENT & MATERIAL CONDITION Bulk work 0
Level l&2 (required for restart) complete 0
other bulk wort Modifications e
PMs e
Surveillance tests Technical issues required for start-up (including CAL issues) e StandmJs for system readiness & matenal conusticn Operator work-arounds: 110 U.2 and Common Unit Let annunctators:14 ht at 100% power f all Corrective Action completedt
~
Control room caution cards: 510 at Mode 2 to 1.
Non outaec 005 cards: 110 at Mode 2 to 1.
~
Cont.nl Room Iempor*ry Alterations: 5 3 Centrotiers in Manual i 2 Control Room Deficiencies: s to t netneenng M quests & Desien Changes Requred for Start-up 100 % Completed i
On4ine Maintenance schedule working e
0 2 350 activities scheduled per week 0
E75*4 schedule completion ACTION Ph.ANS Recovery 8tn Action steps involving discovery or operator readiness complete e
OPERATIONS READINESS Operator Assessment initiauve Items Address,d (Rutherford, attitude towards change improved)
Routine Operations performance meett Operational Readhwss standards e
Cone:tive actions from first demonsir.non observations reviewed and addressed bv Operations Manager e
Operations Manager reviews and afurms readiness to resume Operational Readiness Demonstration CORRECTIVE ACTION No overdue NTS items (50.54f performance retred items) e No overdue root cause investigations Operating experience review issues and corrective actions required for startup ioentified and scheduled READINESS ASSESSMENTS
\\
Department Assessments 0
complete and approved by ZRP System Readiness e
0 Final system reviews & afntmauons complete MANAGEMENT REVIEW & APPROVAL 0
Management confirmation of a high level of confidence that Recovery Plan objectives will be met and few items retr.nin 0
Overall review for Readiness by ZRP and SVP
')
(" check & adjust")
Must approve individual exceptions Must assess and approve aggregate Input from Quality & Safety Assessment OVERSIGitT Assessment of Readiness by NOD e
C3 RECOVERY \\WEEKLYSULLETTS'DEMOSTR2. DOC I
j
' ~ ~~':"!%% : :-_ _ ;. %=&PM::: " "' '
^
XRC Public Briefing October 17,1997 L
1
The Safe Restart and Return to Service of Zion Station
_~ - -
AGEXDA n g_,.-
e Restart Schedule D. Bump Identification of Restart issues e Technical Issues T. Luke i
e Operator Performance T. O'Connor e Demonstration Criteria R. Starkey e Demonstration Program K. Bartes
. Closing Comments J. Brons 3-
Key Restart Schedule Dates
__m e ITS Implementation: 12/1/97 e Station Operational Demonstration:
11/3/97 to 11/26/97 e Unit 2 Restart (enter Mode 4}: 12/4/97 l
e Unit 2 On-Line (Mode 1}: 12/17/97 4
'l
Identification of Restart Issues
,._, g initial Review of Sources of Potential Restart issues Designated Review Tearn ZRC Vahdation
,,e x
x
/
j
\\
N tw A
/
Source of j
I
/
Potential 4
Start-up
\\
Start-up h
h Restart I
I Restartissues /
Screening Criteria /
x'\\ Screening Criteda/
l Database
/
-[
\\
/
\\N/[
'w___._-
ye Post &m PMs Zen Recovery Scope Management Gwomane Zen Recovery Scope Mwiegement Gumashne Pass Cracal PMs Taba 2 Restest issue Shocreerung Calene Table 2 Restat issue Seischorrseening Cssene Post Due S.sveast spertsmance Tests Open Funsivee Joos open c
- t'PWs Open Raas Cause Evalue ene ym _.. _ _ -
Tamparer, Amarenans Operamar Worth Canem noom Deacianoes Procease Cr*anges CeJuan Cads OpenOdedSe wee 9 1-14s Degewsso E cMpment Open Engswweg Reame:s Open Demon Chances
'.smar Acsan Pm -
Carrecs e Messerance Sachace aft 4.evel 1 Adam tenne System Revers i
5 i
t
Identification of Restart Issues m
. _ m... _ _ _.,7_.,___,__,,,.,~.
Review of Emergent Potential Restart issues Responsible Department ZRC Validation
,/N A
. _..y
/
'N
\\
-~ x N
N
[ ~~..___.. -!
/
Restart Start-up
}y._
-_p{
Database l
/
mergent
._____y' Start-up g\\ creening Critena/
/
estartissues /
\\ Screening Criteria' R
' % -.-,.. J l
,/
~
PiF s Zm Reo.ory Scape Managemens Guwsence Zson Reco6ery Scape Manes,ement G=deinw Rocs Cause Em Tsue 2 Restart haue Semananiscreencg Creene Tape 2 Restat issue Seecson/Sasening Creare Operab% Assesaments Tengwarmy Anerabant Operasar waark-Anourids Conrai Room Descianaes Prece&re CNw%ee Caumon Cads Open N of Services PT-tee Nades Equemers Engmeere-2Reipsa.'
Demon C3mnges Aomon Raauests v4ws Requests Adentems 1
6 l
m
i i
t i
ENGINEERING ISSUES 4
~ _ -,m ____
,m_,m_
t RESOIVFD DC Load Shedding Profile Air Filters Containing Aluminum in Containment l
i 7
l ENGINEERING ISSUES
. _mmmm_ _
_. _ m_. m COMPLFTF Containment Coatings T1ermolag Wes~:inghouse Transmitter Drift (Part 21) 8
l ENGINEERING ISSUES
- m ymy SUBMITTED TO NRC IWE/lWL Relief Request NUREG 0737 II.D.1 (PORVs anc PSVs)
VT-2 Heac Bolting Relief Request i
I 9
ENGINEERNiISSUES
- - _=ss m ___ _
_ m PHYSICAL WORK RFMAINING Appendix R Coricerns with Emergency Diesel Generator HVAC lso Phase Bus Shorting Plate DC Contro, Power to Safety-Relatec Breakers 10 1
ENGINEERING ISSUES
_ _-,_,,m _
IN PROGRFSS Aux. Bldg.. Ventilation System Delta-P SG Tube Rupture Response Time GL 96-01 Containment Spray Pump Diesel Issues SI Flow for Small Break LOCA l
11
m f
ENGINEERIN G ISSUES
_m
_ _:_ m=m _
IN PROGRFSS Emergency Diesel Generator Reliability l
Containment Spray NaOH pH Service Water System (Zebra Mussels)
Main Steam Pressure Transmitters GL 96-06 l
12
i Operations Perfonnance
-_+nnnw~
SIGNIFICANT ACTIVITIFS:
Separation of Unit 1 and Unit 2 Service Water Safeguarc s actuation testing - Bus 248 a instrument Bus 213 1
OSP 97 Test of Autostart Inhibi':
Circuitry for Bus 149 i
13 1
Configuration Control
- ~ x ~ sc e m s w _=- _. = a m=a r - ~ ~ ~
The root cause investigation has been completed inconsistent standards Follow-up on past issues n
Work practices Scope of activity 31 systems require verification 16,765 valves to be verified and independently verified Actions completed to-date 79% of lineups are complete Mispositioned components are dealt with immediately Actions required prior to restart Compete lineups Complete necessary procedure changes 1L
f DepartmentalImprovements
. ---ng,g
____g,,,,,-.
Plan of the Day (Ops Priorities)
Engaging the Workforce n Bargaining Unit involvement in projects Outage Management Team established Peer involvement Operations Event Responses Recognition of events Days of Success Clock Overtime deviation performance l
15
l l
Departmental Challenges
_-s,,s,
__ g;mg,n, Operating Procedural issues Attention to detail Technical reviews n Change process amendments OOS Errors Shift Manager overview role Accountability / reinforcing expectations
~
l Timely corrective actions and execution
' Departmental Get Well Plan i
Departmsntal Self Assessment 16
Departmental Successes
,=,
Engaging the Workforce Bargaining Unit involvement in arojects Outage Management Team established l
l Overall Work Schedule support ("Getting l
Work Done"}
Operations Event Responses Overtime deviation performance 17 q
PARAMETER STA TilS -
S TA Tils -
SiA TUS -
STA TUS-STA TUS.
924/97 IP'1/97 10'L97 10/15/97 IW22N7 PLANT EQUIPMENT &
M ATERI AL CONDITION Hulk Work Level l&2 (required 25 26 24 22 e
for restart) complete Other Bulk Work e
Modifications 21 19 18 16 PM's Sch:duled Past 216 154 127 21 e
Due Surveillance tests past 164 161 127 101 e
due Technical issues required for 21 20 20 20 start-up (including cal.
issues)
Standards for system readiness & material condition Operator work-29 29 29 28 e
arounds: s 10 U-2 and Common Unit Lit annunciators: 5 4 6
5 6
6 e
lit at 100% pow er (allCorrective Action completed),
Control room caution 15 17 14 19 e
cards: $ 10 at Mode 2 to 1.
Non-outage OOS 147 135 140 147 cards: $ 10 at Mode 2 to 1.
Control Room 17 17 17 14 Temporary Alterations: 5 3 Controllers in Manual 7
7 7
7 s2
- Control Room 19 14 13 11 Deficiencies: s 10 Engineering Requests 15 18 12 II e
Required for Start up:
100 % Completed Design Changes 0
1 0
1 Required for Start-up:
100 % Completed On-line Maintenance schedule working Activities scheduled 527 597 492 SS9 e
per week Actnities completed 415 418 376 385 e
per week (incl.
emergent work) Goal
> 350 Schedule completion -
70' e 63 %
70 %
58%
e Goal 275%
Operational Readiness Demonstration Program
_y.s g
_ __ _ __.yym,-__
Purpose Verify O aerators perform to expecta: ions Verify Zion Station Departments are ready to support Operations n Verify that Plant equipment is ready to operate 19
i Operational Readiness Demonstration Program
_,_.,z,
,,mmm_,_
Demonstration Contents i
Routine Operational Activities Special Evolutions j
i Simulator Exercises 4
i 20 I
Operational Readiness.
Demonstration Program 4
. b Um.
4,-..
..- !. _, i. h
.I
^
Performance Measurement High Level Performance Goals Attribute Performance Goals Evaluation Methodoloav Station Performance Indicators Management Monitoring Program 2'
-m-
+ -
,,--w
~
t I
i l
The Safe Restart and Return to Service of Zion Station
)
\\
1
\\
\\
1
\\
^
t i
\\
m
\\
{
i I
l V
\\
q i
ea e_d' 4-_4
-.%_4l.
_,2__
--__-m 4--%_._.-,m Aw._
-.-.4 m-.+>a a.,-._-
e-A
%.do.A4-4e>
.sh--w**.-e am--eA-a 44-=.i=._.*.*e.+-*e4
--dadM-L-*e
-h+ww-arh-m haA--me-4
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
ik Z
N o<
o Q
1
- s i
\\
s e
e W
Q
~
\\
M
~.
Q 1
k A
g
\\
s.
1 4
%e N
- s s
Crq F
i s
=
i e
_..-._______________________.i,
The Safe Restart and i
i Return to Service j
of Zion Station l
1 i
i 4
i i
l rx 1
h<
X V
-vm-
i AGEXDA
'i'.*#:
gi * :LJ _
- *,, ;I,' 59* M 13f l
Opening Comments J. Brons e
e Demonstration Progress and R. Starkey Key Dates 4
e Operations T. O'Connor i
i e Quality and Safety Assessment R.Zyduck 1
~
e Corrective Action R. Godley 4
e TechnicalIssues T. Luke i
l 4
Closing Comments J. Brons e
P 3
i i
5 i
i Key Dates l
i l
e Station Operational Demonstration:
completes 12/3/97 i
e Comed Evaluation for Restart: 12/4/97 -
i i
12/19/97 I
l e Plant Startup, Heatua and Power Ascension: 12/22/97 -1/19/97 1
4
i l
i Simulator Demonstration
_ n x:,,. u a
. c. a, j
1
~
)
e Purpose was to demonstrate:
The Control Room team's ability to exercise command and control Proper reactivity management i
l QNE problem icentification and l
i intervention c
)
5 1
i l
Simulator Demonstration 1*L utlu.'..,
A RTT%M 1
e Purpose was to demonstrate l
n Effective crew communication
)
Conservative decision-making Infrequently performed evolution brief 1
Response to outside distractions f~
Shift Manager ownership of performance i
0 l
i Simulator Demonstration m..,_
e Evaluators:
i i
n Operations Line Management-INPO Reverse-Loanee i
NOD Training
.nstructors QS&A Other Comed Stations 7
i i
Simulator Demonstration
,, =
i e Results:
n All crews performed safely
]
4 of 5 crews passed in-full, with the failures 4
being:
- A QNE knowledge issue i
l
- A Shift Manager and Unit Supervisor did not l
meet pre-job brief expectations regarding situational management.
n Line Management setting :he standarcs for performance l
i i
i j
Simulator Demonstration 1
j i
\\
e
Conclusion:
1
(
n These evolutions demonstrate that the corrective actions implemented are I
effective in improving performance in the j
areas of reactivity management, QNE i-involvement, command / control, conservative decision-making, Control I
Room decorum and briefings.
'j l
l i
j 9
l l
.y l.
(
Simulator Demonstration
. =----
i i
e
Conclusion:
r; l
Corrective actions that made this change occur:
- Phoenix training
-Operations Standards
-Reactivity Computer
-Operations assessment
-Shift Manager 1-on-1's (accountability)
- Prompt investigation process j
10 i
I
)
Simulator Demonstration
.=
. u nn..
e
Conclusion:
Corrective acti$ns that made this change occur:
-Crew reconstitution
-Instructor standards aligned with Operations Standards
-Station priorities driven by Shift Manager
-QNE as crew member
-QNE/ Engineering interface 11 l
L i
Operation.s Perfonnance f
l e Recent operational event on 11/8/97 -
t l
Hydrogen Seal Oil
~
27 days since last event - 10/12/97 Service l
Water header split I
i i
1 i
i j
12 i
)
i
I l
1 i
l Operations Performance l
l e Significant activity without events:
i 2B RHR LCO window i
l U1 backfeed for Line 2221 I
l Bus 248 undervoltage safeguards test I
8 i
l Station Heating Glycol Heat Exchanger j
Blender modification testing j
l 96-01 contact / testing review (EDG) l 1
l-i i
13 l
l
9 g
l Zion Station 7
Operations Station Event Free Clock Resets S0 40
~
q --
i 30 MA i
l g
)
10 4
j 1
1 1
I I
I I
0 0
O Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct how Dec 5
m ens Event F se Ciock Resets J
1 9
NT i
i
9.7.:
,.y.
Zion Station
)-
Operations Days of Success Clock Resets i
50 1
i s
j, -
St; 40 i.
9 1-
) ~
i q
30 l -
20 i.
i i
I
! ~
10 I
I 2
37 l
0 N
i 10d3 10/10 10/17 10/24 10/31 1 117 mOperatus Error Free Clock Resets
~ Cumulative
-Goal (>40 Days Between Resets)
-Awrage Days Between Resets I
1
i, i
Operations Days of Success Clock
)
m e Purpose is to raise the department's j
consciousness regarding performance by lowering the overall threshold for identification of issues 4
i l
e Goal is to identify event precursors and 1
build predictability f
1 i
1 u
I l
l Operations Days of Success Clock l
e Departmental Resets that are a lower threshold than t'he station clock:
)
Standards, procedure or policy deviations i
n Configuration control anomalies (any) i l
Radiological or hazardous material events (lower PCEs anc. contaminated floor space j
limits) j Unjustified schedule delays j
Unanticipated unit performance situations 17 i
l Operations l
Day.s of Success Clock 4
..y e Departmental Resets that are a lower threshold than the station clock:
n Events resulting from non-conservative decisions, inattention to c etail and/or failure i
to self-check Preventable safety accic ents (lower threshold) n Security events l
Any other poor performance as determinec by Operations Senior Management
c 1
?
l -
Zion Station
)
1 Station OOS Events Implemented OOS Plan 5 7-----------
e-.
Goal: < 4 Events Per Quarter s
4 8
8 1
j s
l S
s l
3 I
4 Last Event - 10/15/97 (Misung Ta e
I;_-
t 2
2 2
i j
g l
t
!~
i l
i -
i 1
1 1
1 i
0 0
0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct kw Dec j
u Station OOS Events i
f i
?
I i
[
l i
OOS Process Performance Monitoring and Event Threshold for Zion Station Potential for injury or Damage m
V
...O rrno l.:y.cnt.TAtul 1d...................
....r........
!9 db H
A
....................................f......._
Proposed Event Threshold R
R I
...E.r.r.c.r..T. h..r.e.s h.o.l.d............. o..............
R E r......e.c.u.rs o.r.T.h..Pe.shol.d...
s.
(OOS Process Progression
- )
Write up Manipulation Configuration Error OOS Planning OOS OOS Required Scheduling Approval Verifications i
i
l Operations Assessment For
!l.
Startup
=
l l
e items identified:
Administrative burden on :he Shift Manager (QSA)
Mari. 'c.nent Monitoring Program I
1 l
effectiveness (QSA)
Operator turnovers (QSA)
I n Line management involvement in training
)
l n Planning and coordina': ion of work 21 l
l Operations Assessment For Startup 4
i e Items identified:
(
incor3 oration of Industry standards into
?
procedures l
Documentation controlling plant configuration i
n Operator logs, briefs and orders i
i 22 l
l l
Operations Assessment For l
Startup
)
e Items identifie' d
I n Problem identification thresholds Operator ownership of ec uipment Limiting Condition of Operation tracking Corrective action effectiveness and commitment tracking Customer focus by 03erations to other I
Departments 23 I
i
! 9:: '
!.R. -
i i
l Zion Station l
Operations Action item Backlog 3oo i
j 25o 200 1
~
150 f
120 i oo.. _
~
l 50 -
~
1 1
i O
f' Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Now Dec ted n om, eat G al I
l
l Corrective Actions Completed l
t i
i I
t e Items That Are Complete With Visible j
Changes in Performance:
\\
l Improved Operations Standards and i
f adherence 1
l Increased departmental teamwork,
)
including more Bargaining Uni involvement in processes and projects Operations Communications Policy
~
Improvements in turnovers, briefs,
)
logkeeping and night orders 2s e
ca i
i Coirective Actions Completed l
\\
~ ~.
,
e items That Are Complete With Visible 3
Changes in Performance:
t improved procec ure change process and I
reduced backlog Operations Get Well Plan Operations. Days of Success Clock Improvec human performance monitoring OOS process improvements, inclucing single point-of-contact 3
26 i
Corrective Actions Completed
=
=~
I e items That Are Complete With Visible
)
Changes in Performance:
j n Declining commitment back:og and number overc ue n Leacing work schecule areaaration and increasec schedule adherence Increased use of lessons learned in shift activities n Improvements to the Management Monitoring program
Configuration Control
--l
=-
e Four Corrective Actions Prior To Restart:
Administrative control changes
-Management expectations and aolicies n System walkc.own status:
-Mode 3 SOls - 99.9% complete
-9 valves left c ue to corrective work oust:ending 28
Configuration Control e Four Corrective Actions Prior To Restart:
Procedure revisions 1
-Of 64 SOls,39 are revised and undergoing Onsite Review Just-In-Time Training l"
-Package for event / corrective actions / administrative control expectations
-Roles of Shift /OWCC personnel 29
Q&SA Identified Issues e M&TE Control e Operator Training e Recovery Plan e Maintenance Rule e Work Control 30 f
Q&SA Current Activities
=
e Operations Coverage Simulator Activities On-Shift Activities AOP/EOP Audit e RP Audit e Recovery Plan Assessments e Demonstration Program / Field Observations e Work Package / Modification Issues 34
Corrective Action Program
~.
==-
eCRG
~
Q&SA ic entified initial implementation difficulties
-Charter not clearly communicated l
-Required attendance narrow
-Meeting minutes follow-up weak 32 3
l Corrective Action Program
.-=
eCRG Corrective Actions
-Charter requirements clarified
- Attendance expanded
-ESC rolled into CRG to eliminate duplication
-Dedicated staff / Improved report 33
Corrective Action Program m.._,.
- m. m.m eCRG Results
- Consistent attendance - Ops /Maint/Eng/RP
- Review time decrease as ownership increases
-Increase in Potential Trends Challenges l
-Competition for Manager's tirne 1
34
Corrective Action Program m=.
I e CARB Q&SA Icentified Implementation Difficulties l
- Preparation
- Attendance
-Consistency
-Department Head At RCI Presentation
-Emergency Meetings 35
Corrective Action Program
_ =
eCARB Corrective Actions
-Emphasized Expectations
-Review Charter at Each Month's Turnover
-Dedicated Staff Support 4
36
1 Corrective Action Program i
l
._,_,_====c
.CARB Results l
-Meetings Conducted on Schedule
-Department Head Attendance Required
-24 Hour Prior Review
-Departmental Acceptance of Corrective Actions Challenges
-Maintain / improve Consistency of CARB
-Continue to Raise RCA Standards 37
Corrective Action Program e Nuclear Tracking System Process inefficiencies Challenge Line
-Data Entry Lag /Untracked items
-Closure Package Quality
-Inaccurate Status of Items 38
Corrective Action Program.
= = -
I e Nuclear Trackirig System Corrective Acti6ns
-Procedure Revision to Require Documentation / Quality Review
-Regulatory Assurance Self Assessment of Process
-Process inefficiencies (In & Out of NTS) 1 Identified
-Roles / Responsibilities Clarified
)
-Help Desk Establishec 39
i Corrective Action Program m.m m.z e Nuclear Tracking-System Results
-Improved Throughput
-Improved Status
-More Timely Updating
- Greater Customer Satisfaction Challenges
- Duplicate Tracking
-End of Month Jam
-Sustaining Closure Rate > Generation Rate Q&SA to Perform Follow-up Audit
o e
1996 t h
TOT T
i 5*
Jan-97 i._,g i
Feb-97 y 1 gj i
Mar-97.- g i
+
Apr-97 g
b o,
May-97 h g
b i
g Jun-97 ] g g
c-Jul-97 g
"3 u
a "o
i 7
Aug 97 @
g Q
Sep-97 ]
9 O
~~%
T Oct 97 q g 1
71 TOTAL '
M h
YTD x _:
.u _._ _ _
enaeemes em, s.
a.
1, 2 5 8 m R " g 5' n $.
E9E
- E ct sS as a E' F3$ 335' 3
- "E E'E
""+
'Eg8 E'8 u rg E 85;
- i' O
s o g a
- g ::
m a.:
3 a n E E' * $ 3 [ $
k $ ~~
,H RsE s <e u o o8 - "' 3 E
m o s *-
et a
gn -
a73 o
$,y x < w ~@,e e
c
=
w"[$
30 3
W.
e.
2, g
a, s
- 3 j' a " eye sa m
o w
m So
!E En E
~*
om n o E
m 8 *7
- 49rE6 o
5 e s' E, #
o o
e g
- o = {2, 8'$
o N.
3 g
-= 3 8jZ 3
o 2.
3e"+m BR>
s
< R o E M, [, a!. y n.
9 a
a
-*a
-.o_-
o
== - E' m k CL m T
n--
~"
"-~
m a
O M
s 0)
CD O
M N
Jan-97
.u_ w
=4>
i d
Feb-97 a g_;m..
si, 1
f Mar-97
..m v a!
I Apr-97
.. x w
t, May-97
.,. a...,sx.... _.,
o m a
euem Jun-97 m
m w
6 U1
=
Jul-97 O,
g a
y y
Aug-97 1
m T"3 Sep-97 a:
(D Cu M
Oct-97 y.. m~
s.
ACTION LEVEL (D
-_a__.._.,C.m_
._...L..-
>2 0a (D 4O"W 3* N >
5' ~ 3 *N3 *aO O n
3
$ s-5 33 3hE:
=ga U)g _ g Esna G3 po "3g*2sa"m:p R-3 c
k cp 3 0 m g-g r=
cO m 3
g m 3 )Gc3 <
E.
(D e 04 3 O ~O (O
3 bM $
.7
^^
39O 5' g _.
W b
. $C Ig 9,,
3 0 3 2 m#
3 o
e n
32 5' 3
~_ggg378.h 3
-O 3m-n (D
%M m
O M
@ m 7#
m 3n
$ G
,c,,
r 2
r o N tr $ O ? 3 --
5 to Qa
- os 3 6' ("D
@ m :T cD
@ 3 V
O O m 5' 3 m'O o3 W < Os c
E, 5' '
- ~'n 3
3 e au
< ~ c - O <$ $ h o
o
=r
- b. * $, $ ;r
- g+
h
$oghN
~
3 7n-O g -m@
a0 C
3 O 5 tD 3
< 6' O O ; 8 O
N 3
V
~
a, o, a a _ - o n a cra--S-O a
3 e, 3 -.
- 3 e
- n. a GO O
e 0 m n=
5as EeNe~B9*8-2 ESS93 W
R n :r 3
--=0 a
- R*EsRO o,r
- a g g 6-G na mO m=
ea c-n
=
O 3. - r y
,o n, 5 ;-
a e.3. 3 ;;r.:7 u _ =r M
t
< r
-3 5-a3
- r x
M - -
a c a a
_. O 3 3 :r -
l l
l
o 8
E 8
N 8
.8
{
i N
Jan.97
- ~'1l0 l
6 E i$
]
Feb-97
'l !8 d
'~~
3 o oz i
i Mar 97
"'M U
F3 i
i t
i 1st Qtr OD I I e l
I 4
Apr-97 l Id!
A I
- l 4
May-97 I ~l : M i j
e i e g
i t
i Jun-97 l M l
2nd Otr OD I O c'
j c'
O ff t
t 5
Jul-97 0
- 8
" O s
a N
Aug-97 } ".
hg N
2 0 '
Sep-97 O
O 3rd Qtr 0 0 O *.
9 a
M i
O Oct-97 n i i
4 D
4th Qtr OD C n 8
.I B Bi!8 EEj e QRa#RH 1R to!952 8**6'36Eo8E'*3**3 E 3
S -4 9 " E 'mc $
nN sE.Oa5'n??.,*s3
?.
$3 E
5 95}!=6 E $' *
- i? 3 ". ; f' E s.{
" 5 'y 3
g a
2 3 3 3 o
W
@eN6'nE3a<
n
'e 7b2 5' E: S
$ ps <oog&.&6 3 s -@ o y
~N C
- ~
C O
"1 G'
O E--e538 3
o
= =
o
-c3 7 t
.7 a E
O g e6G3o7 3 2 7 om@ ~o3 m
2-C 3
oe a-o a :r ~ --
O a
a-3 a-3 3<.
Eamo<
<n a
cn a m :7 --mlo Ru c
a a
- m m < '= '
~
s 3"3ma63go3C3Ea~
?
5.0 ga M
- > a-- < o o
e o
a y a.n m
9mEgEnE
- 3. F *. E *3 9
2 co m
o m
o<
a o
m 3 *x
- T @O o3
- a g w<
y, goc 3m g o -,*.
g.
oa aa u
a o 8 > o. 9 3 ;. g ( $ o= < a n u n
8 N 3 c r 2' c
=
w=ma5 E m *a 0Oo E
9o m 5' $
- 9 d '.; *3 m-e 8
sc*=
ga3-a
.=
oo w=
n E E.R,@a m g
e RE"3$,4ofE 8#935' y
@.g ** O 9>"e
-G O k3 G.m < ;, re @ @
ZION STAT 10N C13 - Corrective Act, ion Items i
Definition:
The number of corrective action items resulting from NOVs, PIFs, 361 349 LERs and CARS that have been opened 337 350 and closed per month, and the total l
314 278 open items per month. This includes 300 NTS items with a Doc Type
- 100,
=
240 233 254 7
- 180, 181,
- 200, 230 and 315.
243 216 250
.. ~
~~
(* opened / closed / total open vor the
____7___.
200 month). Closed = Complete + Ready 150 Action Level: A 25% deviation, higher or lower, than the previous six-month s
100 7
rolling average.
50 0-m--
k Analysis:
g p
l Zion Station is currently meeting Action Jan Feb M ar Apr. May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Level Treshold. While October yielded a
_ a Rerraning O Opetie~d '
'~
Oosed'~!
23% deviation from the previous six-l O
month rolling average, this increase is expected given the Station's increased efforts to document and track commitments. The backlog of open Corrective Action (CA) items has gradually increased from 278 to 361 in the last four months; and the overall number of CA items is slowly trending upwards when viewed year-to-date.
26 I
i Root Cause Report Approval Rate Over the Past 5 months Jun-97 Jul-97 Aug-97 Sep-97 Oct-97 I
30 _.
~
_ _100%
lyi,Nesw
~~
^"'
25 __
~
^
.G'*'.-
20..
__ 50%
15.-
40%
~~
8 8
__30%
_0L 0
G Report Redewed -*-Approval Rate -+-Goal l
)
1
k 6
u 8
8 u
8 u
8 i
u8 8
.s
~
.s 8
8 i
S e
j ew a~
O C
c-5
-l i
a
~
e
+
g.
e -
i 9b
--5 j
O O
9 I
8 1
8 g
2 OD V
i m
g l
'T o
g s
=
8 l
m.
7@
6 GP l
^
3 1
e J
O f
l I
d 1
T I
W 1
Average Completion Time for RC Investigations i
Jan-97 Feb-97 Mar-97 Apr-97 May-97 Jun-37 Jul-97 Aug-97 Sep-97 Oct-97 160 --
-- 80.0%
147 140 --
-- 75.0%
p_g--* 72.5%
1 120 -
-- 70.0%
100 --
- S4 S%
64 9 %
-- 65.0%
80 --
- 60.0%
77 -
60 --
- - 55 0%
51 40--
-- 50 0 %
20 --
-- 45.0%
0 l
l l
l l
l l
l l
40 0%
i
--0-Amrage Days -+- 12 Mor,th Rotting Awrage I
Potential Adverse Trend PIFs Issued i
Jan-97 Felr97 M ar-97 Apr-97 M ay-97 Jun-97 Jul-97 Aug-97 Seg>97 Oct-97 12 -
10.
i i
i i
i i
i
- i
Corrective Action Program m._
e Operations Training / Qualification Procedures Configuration Control Standards / Performance / Command &
Control e RPA Contamination Control e 2B EDG Starting Air Compressor Failure
~
49
i i
i TechnicalIssues
.w e a
- 4. :' :n.
- m,LIAag --
r e Issues on June 6 CAL Supplement Aux Builcing Differential Pressure
-Working with NRR and Region
-Physical Work Scheduled for Compietion on 12/3/97 Containment Coatings
-Submitted RAI Response on 9/5/97
-Reached Technical Agreement with NRR 50 l
i TechnicalIssues
.. =
e issues on June 6 CAL Suaplement i
DC Control Power to Breakers
-Reached Technical Agreement with Region
- Remaining Work Scheduled for Completion on 4
12/5/97 i
DC Load Shecding Profile
-Reached Technical Agreement with Region
-Work Complete 51
TechnicalIssues
- -=
e issues on June 6 CAL Supplement Appendix R Concerns with Diesel Generator HVAC
-Reached Technical Agreement with Region
-Work Complete Main Steam line Pressure Transmitters
-Working on Resolution 52 l
TechnicalIssues 1
~~=t w -
. w m u c.-
e issues on June 6 CAL Supplement l
Air Filters Containing Aluminum in Containment
-Reached Technical Agreement with Region
-Work Complete 53 i
i l
TechnicalIssues sm;2d 5~ f f,7N. '. " *,,
'l.{ [$2 k[Q ',' r l
e issues Previously Discussed Thermolag
)
-Work Complete Westinghouse Transmitter Drift (Part 21)
-Work Complete.
i IWE/lWL Relief Request
-Submitted to.NRC 9/3/97 NUREG 0737 II.D.1 (PORVs and PSVs)
-Submitted to NRC 8/29/97.
TechnicalIssues
~. _ _
e Issues Previously Discussed t
VT-2 Head Bolting Relief Request
-Preparing RAI Response
-Submittal Scheduled for 11/21/97 SI Flow for Small Break LOCA
-Submitted 10 CFR 50.46 Supplement 11/11/97 1
55
TechnicalIssues
~ _..
e issues Previously Discussed GL 96-06
-Preparing RAI Response
-Submittal Scheduled for 11/21/97 Iso Phase Bus Shorting Plate
-Work Complete SG Tube Rupture Response Time
-Work Complete 56
l l.
TechnicalIssues l
e issues Previously Discussed 4
GL 96-01 i
~
-Review Complete t,
l
-Procedure Revisions and Tests in Progress to Support Restart Containment Spray NaOH pH
-Testing Scheduled for Completion 12/10/97 n Containment Spray Pump Diesel Issue
-Preparing Report for Zion Restart Panel 57 l
l TechnicalIssues l
__, m j
e Issues Previously Discussed i
l Emergency Diesel Generator Reliability j
-Preparing Report for Zion Restart Panel I
Service Water System (Zebra Mussels) i 4
-Preparing Report for Zion Restart Panel 1
i i
1 f
58 I
l TechnicalIssues
_ m=. :
x i
i l
\\
Main Steamline Pressure Transmitters l Working on Resolution l i
Aux Building Differential Pressure Working with NRC i
l DC Control Power to Breakers l
Containment Coatings j
l DC Load Shedding Profile l~
Appendix R EDG HVAC Air Filters Containing Aluminum in Containment i
l 59 1
i I
l l
TechnicalIssues 1
Previously Discussed
~ a-l GL 96-01 l
Work in Progress VT-2 Head Bolting Re!ief Request h
Preparing Response L
GL 96-06 to NRC IWEllWL Relief Request NUREG 0737 II.D.1 (PORVs & PSVs)
{
p
,4.
SI Flow for Small Break LOCA Thermolag Westinghouse Transmitter Drift ISO Phase Bus Shorting Plate i
l l
60 i
The Safe Restart and Return to Service of Zion Station 5
i
'T I
Qs2: RATING OF WORK ENVIRONMENT BY BARGAINING UNIT PERSONNEL 1=Very Poor 3= Average 5= Excellent 1
5
(.pg y= y 8
n.<G e n ;+
, A.n. =.
, p;
, g g,, 4 y-g
,nn n
v
." A;,=g 7,1 M f.f g,rp %
,,9.s:;
m,.?w w:@y c - v am A
w,J m A ;q %,--'u,. N v.4b, gr.
c
< ~
a g
.a
,ws
~
. Ar.
a,
.w; e ~ s,.e.
w+,,, mm.n
.+
- n~ n.w. w, w w n,.we.
w2 s
n..,,e w..q.,.-~m
. y; na,m.,
9~e.n,
- s n y~
+
w;m,.,. %,w w,,
45
~.,4, np, s- +*. w.r
, w
--w
,r.
d e.
- A%
s
.w u e.
.m.-
~
.s. u m, -...c
-a-s- W -G
-y v - a ms
.~e
., R. ib,%;&
~
Wmv? v i T:%
.w4' z -
=w r s,4
..m N a,wo;J
- m. f~e
, &_a b '*_
_Mj $x.p'. -6,wc
- f. k p,%,,, s.-;
M,.,,n,%2 n[ r
~:.r y. y. W ;
T_
.W....'.. _.en,, w t : n. W $.
C..
3c.~ :-
,_ q
, ga,a, _ y,,. ~ )
v u
t,ge*
ws.... s w.
e ;~
n,,
7,. ep.m p*
.j:
+
.-x.
pa.as. - a N
yr. ~3
- n..'
ww -
r
~2=,
-+,
r m _. a.,.y-A~m%w:,.- Sm*..e.3.94 W
- w,.-
an.
on a -gn
.a u
s gy,_
c wp g y -y_
g g
-p~..
'-, n w,; xy y
m 4
i khY iI$$hN %@kh [~ r :,f ky>?M f MhhN x5 au i
u m
%wd
- 4. # w q m-c.t w jm~.y ~.. f 2w -
n; 4.w..qm ud eg 3-w r e w, wm. u%m.. t.-
O*'--
- w.
4 %
xsmy y.w
- n. e,-
t A4
,.c Ws
'r s.
sa yc v.,; ue
.... ~ ' % 4M;
- g cv.
s 4 e
r *
- a.f s.w' s fy'-g y '
~ ~9,,a s4E k. s w
y 29 A
~5
.s.
.y.
a
.v MS. ; %eg.,9 5 WN&g%E WW G Q C, g w, C 4 :
M me WN hy w7 QM g
.w*
t ; g %y A o j w e% qqM z ~ pr!
wWW V z.
Age,m pel@g A
o p
U h
ID3-6 MOS AGoi, z
pg,g a4 n.c m q h Aw.evg 3
-m ch om zg m,
y 3
,,y
. j,
,sp; &a
. a.
!OTODAY ym,m
- w;4. p 2u, p,' y+p yk m. m.
W. e ae g/
m
- +
, e m o;.t x-4
- w..,
g J'
gr a
% x,,
5 - pg., e~
+ %.c a
m:
w w:m, s.
7ma Sy
.e n.
&. :"ha 7:-- x n..
,w.p'.. r m
r.
w -w
- c
- -;g '-' +s ',
u -..
3,' w' L" r,wlc 2,. %
,tq v ^p.
..P n
v
':T :.,
-~ '
x J
L. ",
r':
<7 y L1
%. w,..
a
- m m,.
s
- y.
m..
m g m 9., y. :y 4w:= y y
w
- w ;c.%a~f S %.e.3 MA +y.
y%umy wa p
.y w-@r gz*,g g m:p.g m q 4
. q Vr v
%:.d. '
.g un m.
?
to M y
4 W
G 4*
gy:.,
e,.
Oc m, :
e.
c
% h.
- ~ g 7 %e i
- p' N
s t '.
5 Q%
r.J,
-r 6 w w = : p.c
' rw;
-s y M qgs w
- D' L
%7 2% % % m]$ C;
. j
,.A1_ :Tw d r
M,'w g,, y, @y e g.
2.p.Q
- 4L n
,iM@ Mig < %3 pm
%~
g; qg wn ny h.7 4.52 4,_- :
n _ ei.g6;;c5 Q."42h, M
. cp -
29$
sm.
w:
- . o
-nu y -; m.m w 1.5 4
s?
wn mnan.
n,+.
e
_.A, y w. r.
w -
r.y
.v c.
u,,
c e w,,, m_ A5
.,-,E4',
=
s, y.
, ~,.
- -a, - +;,. m...w;'"F'.
y\\"=
.~
m m i
.'i...
.. p, q'3'wy.
,j '
g a.
d yw c,'
w-%Q n A'.p 9
Y"
., ' ' k.
4G-h' W' W" A;**
g 7
. 4 P
1 1
+
u.
, n.m; ' m
- M P-ss %v '.
m e
_l' y
~.3C a $m, --
- b
+
a n-y s:s n.
m
~wy n
72 OPERATIONS OTHER
Q#9: OPS BARGAINING UNIT COMFORT IN RAISING PLANT SAFETY AND LESSER CONCERNS 1=Very hesitant 2=Somewhat hesitant 3=May or may not 4=Wouldprobably 5= Definitely i
AM I
5
- 1 c us, w m&%i.:.
mm mM, u, n-w ; m _g
. F
,3 -.
--g y,Gw x
a"n> gg*g. m we
.<; g w$;m.,
- m' wwfigy.- > p Q&;.~
- mug:m s um u
n
~fy q.,
d n %Acc650 e._
r 13g n't Ww M t z, y-C..f q -
7+,
fq. qq -
s -<3 W;p%
RM c<
,u fr W r
pN:
g
_ 3.g.3 a
e s
m j. m e.,_.,
o
% s 3.. >
q%
y.n,~V " Q a, 'yeh. r.
c., m.
.x.
g 1
w.w 45 m
- .,._r
, vf
,,,-g
~.,.,,
e p.
s e,,
4
. +;-'
..ca.
s yj, n &. :
w e: g e., n,,.,,.
,e__
ww,,..:.n.e 4,,c.
w+
mg y
+
m w.
na m.
y -. g M. m.~; & q 1-g
.--yg2p4 y 4 7,
gg
- g
.v;_43 y..;,,
,y
..4.w y m.p a
w
,e;3_g g,.
. a, y: m y,.-
e.
m g
4 y,
~
. 3,y s,.y x
- ~-
x,
.-a s,-
xp. :yf. m., yg.
~,
-. =
e-.m_. - - ~,
t
-u uyy y
s y
n
.**..:r-p:._
q, ; y z,-
~m 4.
a y,
+
e m
,%a %
m
.x ;,m,~
as w
~-
u.
n./ %
-' f* N we% :
.g L.
m
.5 A,-
- s-
- m..,
-5 i
m
- w. v.;, w m' '
,A ww.
s r
$} % A
- m. i',,..
p 35
~r w,.
-;. ; ~.y.v,. e...
e n.
,m,,
1,
- s&_.
o
~
u m,
.~ex, s-o
,;g.
4 yw 1,
. m m. m.,..
xm s,,- / y y;
,.z a.
- s m z
.'n -
s n..
t m.
w,~
-p n;.
'OPLANT SAFETY !
f
@r.c.-
- @f g m
.me 4pe 3:n 7. Ap-Pm y
3 }a g_e.
_ ugh _ ~&
,m
-~
_ i
.vm g4 ay ei a
W Ms c.:
%y w 5
- OLESSER ee- -
c
. 2%
e > -
%+~. em%.#,,
-r,.3
.sj:
w w
~.m,.,.
. w. _ -.
s
. y4c g.. 3. -
,, f
.. %.4-p-
,
- M(.g # :, w. M y,-
[ -f s
r
- :,f * ' '
w.
.,h
" ; C.jp. 4 -T * * 'Q..
. wp Q*'>'T.,
i D*, 1
.l., C
- W; 3
,my
- m. e -
.~ w -
-- 5
.m
+
2'5
-M
.t.,
tips ; t,- r
- t 7.g
-)
j"-p c; Ae._,
q;
& r 2..
'g t My "'
,, gh r
,-[
M#
,y.
A.,
J,.p.,A
..4, Qig.{w
.,4.,
.. s
. m.,
.w n.a.,w e p,s e
n.
.f
,y
. ~ -..
,;._, 4
%,;.u o,
r
. g $_n,aQ
%$f i, :f C,
%%,w.Q R W
a c# -
L2g:
,1 m.t 3
q-
- x,*%-'
,,9 w
n.
w c, '+ _,,.,w w.
s e
s g
,,f 2
5.,
c.,.,g t 4 a Jt t'
?'
.ros.w', 5 je $Na
--a EQ
- IIBIAIW 9
%m --
yn y m + 4,s.& _
- _ n m; m '_
5a k,&. n e
l g.
> _.n w
- s. -... x r,..
v
<;n
, my e
w p ym 9 en 3
sm..,: n
. v a~.2,
.x n
.v c
e n.,., v e @xgg
, w p>f-2
, epa e
- u.,
w
-. e.,
-o 2no i ~ n g
. m RwC 2.
1 e
1.5
, q@
sk
. + - +
%:,pmw -
- r.S. y. Wa,..h, % h %
- .A,
.m,
< a c.s
. e. a - ffi snw x,,? ?
.s
.L.
+'
- '. ~T y.
v.
4
',,g*,.m.
-'g.s,.$
.?
g.,-
1.
lC se
""d'
,i-y
,q s.
a e
,o f'"
'V r 4-
.t- '~e y,-
Y,
~
- ^
4 w
s
,m
- 3. ;,
l' N
3 3-6 MOS AGO TODAY
Q#9: OTHER BARGAINING UNIT COMFORT !N RAISING PLANT SAFETY AND LESSER CONCERNS i
i 1=Very hesitant 2rSomewhat hesitant 3=May/May not 4=Would probably 5= Definitely would l
l l
- P 4M.
5-
.s
, 4 86,..r 66.
.g,n,.. -
4 i
,z 3; > ~, -
" w.c
.v n:
t~
~
~
lg (,,
- s-
%, W ~:.
M g
y ~, 9 g_
s
- .~, % $, n
,en
- . k
. ~
-a i
c.
l
, z.-
% w.
- a
- -
4.5 h.
I
.,.e y,
y.
..g u.
,g.
x
+ m y, r e -
.u.
my[ -f A i_ g, _ G.;
,,+
3
.. p-a
,kl-
-h y
u~
n-
.p.-
,+,
j j K a-F.
.. g gg-p-
6 n,:r,:,m,:.
f
,a,,. u.
~.,~.e-
+
u ty,,
4
.n 9:ya
.m
,2 : w s
y5 3
+
n e-L :: w - ~
g,. ;;.
- 3. ;; a o
p
- q ' y )-.
.y QM-f 3 ay %C.
4 3.5
. y
,n 263 p
r 77,3,.
p.,q
.g _,
...c u.
- u.
c w-
- ,3 y
. _3,
.~
3:
n,_.
m
.rce.. m n.
2 ;. 4
-.c s;m -
m, id
!OPWT SAFETY l 3
s, Q-g f 1:
OLESSER
' g g {-;
y, yy
%p
- 3 4
~~
..,, n.
,i
~
c y_.a n
- m
- +.
. v.
m
.u. n
~
n i
?
_ ~ _..
^
~
5
. ~,
m:',r,,
s
_ m ra, s...
w4e,. s.
s
,c, w
- a.
~ A, 3
-w.,
- , w.
JJL,.
- fls,
-d.
-w v
e i.
..Qw-Q '
A,g;.
.c..-,.
. J 7'l s,
i
'24 y
,r 3
g s :,
4 3
,y-f I -
d
[A -'
ya.Q.-
Q 3q y::
R.
s.
.u n
n m,
1~5
/
+
%r.
$'K I
u.,...
f.a m y
a
- u. y.
u w
q;;.
- ~-
+
c s w#
.r n.
.y 4
, tj,,
1
- ~
N OW;p
[*- f a
34 MOS AGO TODAY
s Q#3a: PERCEIVED EMPHASIS ON PLANT OPERATINGINUCLEAR SAFETY 1= Production / cost clearly ' ave priority n
3= Safety, cost, and production have equal emphasis 5= Emphasis is clearly on safety 1
4 46 e --
3._3.. e
. y..-
__ _,4 39 4.5 yg.1 < p-
- 4. a_ m<..,
m..,
w
- . n e
3, g* ' m m
,n a
~ w pp pf3 e
4-c
' %m,
- 31,
_n w
., 3 'W'
. y:&
7 7 :
W y
~
,3
- p -g q).
g; rff Ay g
e
.. g#
- y 1;
w e rgM J;
9.
- m
- e pu :
4 rGu. ; *_ s.~
.: R..h.:
&,A +
w
-cr.
. e-r m.w am
=
_ %-n, -
.w w<
u,s., n..
+%g m
,T g..
, n.n. - -+a..~..s...,
.n
..n, %
w,y. - *
..cxg c u v.m.
n-.,
. w. ;.v.
.,.a m
x,~<---
m p.a m za.
.y v
,.o s
% e,-
w
/
y:r.
+ w;n - s.,.,..
g
.,..ps g
w.
~
~.: w, e n... m~
8~
mpe
+.g...
c m_ ~
y~.
~
os
.5
,[p
,J WO
%- ?
'D
_ h _e
.W
, t-gh.
p a ' c l-
&-M ad_'l",a v4 yy g _"~ ~
p'%s @*
- P k
r T
f(
yr:y,;7 l,y;
.G;[i_ %m%
-'.xp w y z ~g Qri y
n
, <g%
't A'.
as n
~a
~ cec
~
p 9 - gs%w
.v '7;p
.J"
., ; / W:
pM g: F
'52 +
2La
' n ~J,
- g. g
- -1 g.t {,.g,y7ggy gggg{
p'4'gg
- p. 2,.
-. ;L.. - '
.M
- n 3
4her yy_,,.
m t w %g - ~.A *
&,! ff,- Q:j, '
'LO
'
- Lf
- s5 -
{
g p ~_ fT Q
L
?.A % +
M m
n C &?
6 c-W
. L
~
V DOPERATIONS
+
z a +.
o.. u, e.m y
m,_
% we
+w y
r
.;r
', w~ # ~
-.p.
w2 I
e ndco w
c,' Mmc i
%p) 1 -
LJVe Ln w
i.
p - (-
Z.
g- : ggs g
y.
. sy g*
K ~.%
~L f*wc
. 2;%
s
-gg =
- r p a.
y(
..n-g y
m a+
4-2,5
- + -
.,g
-g y,
.x g..+y y
.y m.> m. -e r.
w.
..7,
,k q '-, '
[.* i.
m
.s,
rm p
,Mg' T
- pg] 5 w..
- . r a p
. s, a,r,m
' M * $*
, s a.
t..
n*
ip b-f
- Q Q
- ' f.,
Q ;
'h-f 4_'c' 7 % s t
_ d' 4
-'y
?
7': w.,
' W' p:
'W 5??
.c
_y m
~
- w.,in ' w ~
~ -
as a.~
n
's, x ~aAM;c + $
a v
my 9
m (f O
^
O2V R.
p m, a-m m
e~
w
-ax gir y{ y,y
. ypt ;su.g e"y,
p s
m
.a
. : ~
- u e-v q.p g ;, m,:,#
..7 y;j }c p% %,f,
~g. p.*7 q s.
g.
m
+
4 t
ec r
~
n 0, n
.ug
%m g E-Q ww ~,
.,j f_,
^
. g,
=A j
17 ' w, L 4Gp ~ s ' 4n n, y
. -M t.,
..ac
' w..
w y
y w a~
.-c a
w.u,- +_
- w. e
-w em ca y
c+,
1.5
., gum #
x 4
x_ m 5_g-
~
~-
~
.q.,
m #.j vqw%
w
.n mea :s
-, a. m.y;p z;c L,[ C. s,,
g
.. p w.
~g. c i
o,..
v,
-. m,s u w,-.
a
,m n
r
. ; ~
e
-p -
m.
~_x y z;
.m.
a e
+ -m
. men.sm
-,.y~?.;
w v n m
.s. +
< w, -
mn m
m 1
3-6 MONTHS AGO TODAY
"